Report No.4 of 2017 - Local Bodies Government of Bihar - CAG

Report of the

Comptroller and Auditor General of India

on

Local Bodies

for the year ended March 2016

Government of Bihar

Report No. 4 of the year 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DESCRIPTION Paragraph Page

no.

Preface - v

Overview - vii

Part – A

CHAPTER-I

AN OVERVIEW OF FUNCTIONING OF THE PANCHAYATI RAJ

INSTITUTIONS IN BIHAR

Introduction 1.1 1

State Profile 1.2 1

Organisational setup 1.3 2

Functioning of PRIs 1.4 3

Formation of various Committees 1.5 5

Audit Arrangements 1.6 6

Response to Audit Observations 1.7 7

Accountability Mechanism 1.8 9

Source of Funds 1.9.1 11

Recommendations of State Finance Commission 1.9.2 13

Recommendations of Central Finance Commission 1.9.3 14

Maintenance of Records 1.9.4 14

Reconciliation of Balances 1.9.5 16

Maintenance of Accounts by PRIs 1.9.6 16

Impact of Audit 1.9.7 17

Good Practices 1.9.8 17

CHAPTER-II

COMPLIANCE AUDIT

Panchayati Raj Department

Implementation of recommendations of Fourth State

Finance Commission in PRIs

2.1 19

Loss of rental income 2.2 31

Avoidable payment of penal interest 2.3 32

Audit Report (Local Bodies) for the year ended 31 March 2016

ii

Part – B

CHAPTER-III

AN OVERVIEW OF FUNCTIONING OF THE URBAN LOCAL BODIES

IN BIHAR

Introduction 3.1 35

State Profile 3.2 35

Organisational setup of ULBs 3.3 36

Functioning of ULBs 3.4 37

Formation of Committees 3.5 39

Audit Arrangements 3.6 40

Response to Audit Observations 3.7 42

Accountability Mechanism 3.8 44

Source of Funds 3.9.1 46

Centrally/State Sponsored Schemes 3.9.2 48

State Finance Commission 3.9.3 48

Maintenance of Records 3.9.4 49

Maintenance of Accounts by ULBs 3.9.5 49

Impact of Audit 3.9.6 50

CHAPTER - IV

PERFORMANCE AUDIT

Urban Development and Housing Department

Utilisation of Grants under Civic Amenities Head (State

Plan) by Nagar Nigams

4.1 51

CHAPTER-V

COMPLIANCE AUDIT


Irregular/Unfruitful expenditure 5.1 75

Loss of tax revenue 5.2 77

Irregular payment of advances 5.3 79

Table of contents

iii

APPENDICES

Appendix

No.

Subject Reference

Paragraph Page

2.1 Statement showing main recommendations made

by the Fourth State Finance Commission with

regard to PRIs

2.1.1 83

2.2 Statement showing status of works undertaken

during 2011-16 in the Sampled Units under high

priority sector

2.1.3.4 84

2.3 Statement showing Work executed/found in

Private premises

2.1.3.4 86

2.4 Statement showing out of order Hand Pumps and

Solar Lights

2.1.3.4 88

2.5 Statement showing expenditure incurred out of

untied grant

2.1.3.5 90

2.6 Statement showing difference in Cash Book and

Bank Account Closing Balance as on 31 March

2016

2.1.3.10 92

2.7 Statement showing details of schemes executed

in contravention of the guidelines

2.1.4.1 93

2.8 Statement showing unauthorised occupation of

ZP IBs/lands as on 31 March 2016

2.1.4.2 95

2.9 Statement Showing Outstanding Rents 2.1.4.2 96

2.10 Statement Showing Outstanding Rents by

Government Offices as on 31 March 2016

2.1.4.2 99

2.11 Statement showing deprivation of revenue of

` 3.78 crore (Patna Zila Parishad)

2.2 100

3.1 Statement showing list of functions to be carried

out by ULBs

3.4.2 101

3.2 Statement showing Target and Present Status of

SLBs in Nagar Nigams

3.8.4 102

3.3 Statement showing Receipt and Utilisation of 28

ULBs

3.9.1.3 103

3.4 Statement showing important recommendations

of Fifth State Finance Commission in respect of

ULBs & its acceptance by the State Government

3.9.3 104

3.5 Financial Statement not prepared 3.9.5 106

4.1 Statement regarding transfer of grants to parallel

Bodies

4.1.7.1 107


iv

4.2 Statement regarding utilisation of grants

sanctioned for specific purposes

4.1.7.2 108

4.3 Statement regarding receipt and utilisation of

grants released for construction of parks

4.1.8.1 109

4.4 Statement regarding lack of land for Bus stands 4.1.8.2 110

4.5 Statement regarding receipt and utilisation of

grants released for construction of Bus stands

4.1.8.2 110

4.6 Statement regarding loss incurred/to be incurred

on account of demolition of BQSs

4.1.8.2 111

4.7 Statement regarding details of amount collected

but not deposited in special bank account of

Samuh Vikas Samiti

4.1.8.4 112

4.8 Statement showing loss of Revenue 4.1.8.7 113

- Glossary - 114

v

PREFACE

This Report for the year ended March 2016 has been prepared for

submission to the Governor of Bihar under the CAG’s (DPC) Act, 1971.

The Report contains significant results of the audit of the Panchayati Raj

Institutions and Urban Local Bodies in the State including the departments

concerned.

The issues noticed in the course of test audit for the period 2015-16 as well

as those issues which came to notice in earlier years, but could not be dealt

within the previous Reports have also been included, wherever necessary.

The audit has been conducted in conformity with auditing standards issued

by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

Overview

vii

OVERVIEW

This Report contains five chapters. The first and third chapters contain an

overview of the functioning, accountability mechanism and financial reporting

issues of the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and Urban Local Bodies

(ULBs) respectively. The second and fifth chapters contain compliance audit

paragraphs relating to PRIs and ULBs respectively. Fourth chapter contains a

Performance Audit report on ‘Utilisation of Grant under Civic Amenities

Head (State Plan) By Nagar Nigams’ pertaining to ULBs. A summary of main

audit findings is presented in this overview.

1. An overview of the functioning of PRIs in Bihar

Audit arrangements Thirteenth Finance Commission recommended that the CAG must be

entrusted with Technical Guidance and Support over the audit of all the Local

Bodies at every tier. Government of Bihar accepted (December 2015) the

standard Terms and Conditions for audit of Local Bodies under Technical

Guidance and Support arrangement.

(Paragraph 1.6.2)

The audit of accounts of PRIs conducted by the Examiner of Local Accounts

under the supervision of the Accountant General (Audit), Bihar as per Bihar &

Orissa Local Fund Audit Act, 1925 was discontinued and the audit under

Technical Guidance and Support arrangement commenced from December

2016. During the year 2015-16, Examiner of Local Accounts conducted audit

of 1102 PRIs and Director of Local Fund conducted audit of 127 PRIs.

. (Paragraph 1.6.1 & 1.6.2)

Devolution of functions, funds and functionaries Government of Bihar devolved 29 functions as listed in Eleventh Schedule of

the Seventy-Third Constitutional Amendment Act to the PRIs, as of January

2017.

As per Fifth State Finance Commission report, funds available to the PRIs

from various sources were grossly inadequate for their assigned functions.

Zila Parishads in the State did not have adequate staff to discharge the

devolved functions and 79 per cent of sanctioned posts were vacant as of

January 2017. In Zila Parishads such as Buxar and Supaul, men-in-position

was less than 10 per cent of sanctioned strength. At Gram Panchayat level,

3,160 posts of the Panchayat Secretaries (38 per cent of the total 8,397 posts)

were vacant as of 31 March 2016.

(Paragraph 1.4.3)

Utilisation of funds

As of January 2017, Utilisation Certificates of ` 6,924.71 crore for the period

2007-16 were not submitted by the PRIs and utilisation percentage ranged

between two to seventy nine per cent.

(Paragraph 1.8.3)

Audit Report (Local Bodies) for the year ended March 2016

viii

Maintenance of Accounts by PRIs In PRIASoft, out of total eight Model Accounting System formats, only three

formats were being generated. However, accounting work in PRIASoft was

discontinued since 17 April 2015 and e-Panchayat Module was introduced

thereafter.

(Paragraph 1.9.6.2)

2. Compliance Audits

Implementation of recommendations of Fourth State Finance Commission

in PRIs The State Government accepted all the 17 recommendations made by Fourth

State Finance Commission in respect of the PRIs. However, four

recommendations were implemented in toto, ten recommendations were

implemented with modifications and no action was taken on three

recommendations.

(Paragraph 2.1.1)

Recommendations implemented in toto The Fourth State Finance Commission made four recommendations with

regard to allocation of funds to the PRIs and the ULBs and its subsequent

release to the three tier PRIs. Audit observed that the above recommendations

were accepted by the State Government and implemented in toto.

Recommendations implemented with modifications The State Government implemented ten recommendations with modifications

as detailed below:

Basis for release of grants The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that 7.5 per cent of the

State’s tax revenue net of collection costs should be devolved to the local

bodies on the basis of the audited figures of that financial year. However, the

State Government released funds on the basis of two year old figures. As a

result, against recommendations of ` 4026.55 crore grants, ` 1580.49 crore

was only released during 2010-15.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.1)

Release of grants half yearly in two instalments

Audit observed that, in two years (2011-13) out of the three years of Fourth

State Finance Commission period (2010-15), grants were released in one

instalment at the fag end of the year.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.2)

Release of funds to Panchayat Samitis Audit observed that in Nalanda and Saran districts, funds were not transferred

to the PSs as per the criteria of 80 per cent weight to population and 20 per

cent weight to number of BPL families. Instead, the funds were transferred as

per the population of the PSs.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.3)

Release of grants under high priority sectors

There was short release of funds of ` 635.98 crore to PRIs under the high

priority sectors in 2010-11 and 2014-15. Further, funds amounting to ` 282.37

Overview

ix

crore meant for the exclusive use of the Gram Panchayats were allocated to

the Zila Parishads and the Panchayat Samitis during 2011-14.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.4) Grants for Capacity Building

The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that grants of ` 15 lakhs,

` one lakh and ` two lakh per annum were to be given to each Zila Parishad,

Panchayat Samiti and Gram Panchayat respectively for capacity building

(` 901.35 crore over the five year period of 2010-15 at ` 180.27 crore per

annum). Audit observed that the State Government released ` 538.11 crore

only to the PRIs for three years (2011-14) for Account maintenance and

Capacity Building to fulfil the basic responsibility of planning, budgeting,

spending, accounting and reporting.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.5)

Untied grants The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that the amount of

untied grants remaining after fulfilment of the requirement of priority sectors

were to be spent on purposes consistent with the duties and functions stated in

the Act and were not to be utilised for payment of salary or purchase of

vehicles without previous sanction of the State Government.

Audit scrutiny revealed that for Panchayat Samitis and Gram Panchayats, the

State Government released grants of ` 518.27 crore during 2011-14 in the

ratio of 20:70. However, the Zila Parishads share of ` 108.25 crore was

released for payment of salaries and retirement benefits during 2011-15 as per

the population of the district instead of on other development heads. As a

result, the Zila Parishads failed to receive additional funds to be spent on

purposes consistent with the duties and functions stated in the Act.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.6)

Devolution of Functions, Functionaries and Fund

The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that transfer of

Functions, Functionaries and Fund (3Fs) should be expedited.

Audit observed that the Departments of GoB had transferred (July to

September 2001) 79 functions to Gram Panchayats, 60 functions to Panchayat

Samitis and 61 functions to Zila Parishads and prepared tier wise activity

mapping of devolved functions by PRIs. But the process so far on department-

wise and subject-wise activity mapping was unsatisfactory. Staff was

answerable to their respective departments and the PRIs did not have adequate

staff to discharge the devolved functions. Though funds available to the PRIs

from various sources were grossly inadequate for their assigned functions,

they were not able to utilise even that due to capacity constraints.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.7)

Release of grants for salary of employees The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended for release of grants by

the State Government for salary to Zila Parishad employees without any

tapering for the period 2010-15. However, only 39 to 70 per cent of grants

were made available to the Zila Parishads during 2011-15 as the

State Government released funds on the basis of population instead of actual

men-in-position.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.8)


x

Payment of Retirement Benefits

The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that the arrears of

retirement benefit to employees of local bodies should be cleared by giving

one-time lump sum grants-in-aid. Audit observed that no such grant was

released to the PRIs by the State Government during 2010-15.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.9)

Adoption of accounting formats for PRIs

The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that the accounting

formats prescribed by C&AG should be adopted and accounting manuals be

finalised in consultation with Accountant General. It was also recommended

that the possibility of simplifying the formats may also be explored.

However, Audit observed that out of eight data formats, only three were

generated upto March 2015 and five formats were not maintained as accrual

basis of accounting required was not adopted by PRIs. As a result, financial

statements of the accounts of PRIs were not prepared and therefore, actual

status of assets of PRIs was not ascertainable.

(Paragraph 2.1.3.10)

Recommendations not implemented by the Government The State Government did not implement three of the accepted

recommendations as detailed below:

Grant-in-aid to Zila Parishads and Panchayat Samitis The share in State taxes followed by the grants-in-aid to Zila Parishads and

Panchayat Samitis shall be firstly put to use in filling the gaps in the actual

cost of execution of schemes identified as priority activities. The Fourth State

Finance Commission recommendations and State Government directives

specified the purposes for which funds were to be utilised.

Audit observed, that grants were not released to Zila Parishads and Panchayat

Samitis for the purposes specified in the recommendations of Fourth State

Finance Commission/directives of the Government.

(Paragraph 2.1.4.1)

Financial self-reliance of PRIs and enhancement of revenue The Fourth State Finance Commission recommended that the PRIs, especially

the Zila Parishads, should strive to become financially self-reliant by raising

their own resources by approaching financial institutions for investment in

projects to ensure that the prime lands available to them are put to profitable

use and may also try to explore the possibility of creating assets by adopting

the Public Private Partnership mode. Audit Scrutiny revealed that the four test

checked Zila Parishads failed to approach the financial institutions or adopt

Public Private Partnership mode for profitable use of their prime lands.

Further, the test checked ZPs also failed to initiate action to enhance the

revenue.

(Paragraph 2.1.4.2)

Imposition of Taxes As per Fourth State Finance Commission recommendation, the State

Government should notify the maximum rate of taxes to be levied by the PRIs

to enable them to raise resources or amend the law so that there would be no

need to have government approval.

The State Government failed to notify any rate of taxes as of May 2016. As a

result, the PRIs were unable to generate revenue by way of taxation.

(Paragraph 2.1.4.3)

Overview

xi

Audit Paragraphs

Inaction by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Patna to follow the

orders of the Zila Parishad Board to lease out an eight storied Annexe

Building in existing condition resulted in loss of rental income of ` 3.78 crore

during September 2011 to August 2016.

(Paragraph 2.2)

Delay in release of Fourteenth Finance Commission grants to Gram

Panchayats by Government of Bihar resulted in avoidable payment of penal

interest of ` 8.12 crore.

(Paragraph 2.3)

3. An overview of the functioning of ULBs in Bihar

Audit arrangements The audit of accounts of ULBs conducted by the Examiner of Local Accounts

under the supervision of the Accountant General (Audit) Bihar as per Bihar &

Orissa Local Fund Audit Act, 1925 was discontinued and the audit under

Technical Guidance and Support arrangement commenced from December

2016. During the year 2015-16, Examiner of Local Accounts conducted audit

of 59 ULBs. During the year 2015-16, Director of Local Fund conducted audit

of seven ULBs.

(Paragraph 3.6.1)

Devolution of functions, funds and functionaries Of the total 18 subjects listed in the Twelfth Schedule of Seventy-Fourth

Constitutional Amendment Act, ULBs carried out functions related to 12

subjects and functions of six subjects were carried out by the functional

department of the Government of Bihar.

As per Fifth State Finance Commission report, funds available to the ULBs

from various sources were grossly inadequate for their assigned functions.

Against entitled amount of grants of ` 781.32 crore for the year 2015-16 under

Fifth State Finance Commission, only ` 434.64 crore was released to ULBs.

Of the total 12,453 sanctioned posts in ULBs, 7,145 posts (57 per cent) were

vacant. As of March 2007, 40 per cent posts were vacant which increased to

57 per cent as of September 2016 whereas 96 to 99 per cent posts of technical

staff were vacant. (Paragraph 3.4.2, 3.9.3 & 3.4.3)

Release of funds

The first instalment of Fifth State Finance Commission for the year 2016-17

amounting to ` 462.93 crore was released in October 2016 though it was due

in May 2016 while second instalment was not released (February 2017) to

ULBs in want of Utilisation certificates of grants released as first instalment.

(Paragraph 3.9.3)

Utilisation of funds The Urban Development and Housing Department released grants of

` 10,261.62 crore to ULBs during 2003-15 (up to July 2015) under various

assistance grant heads. But, the Utilisation Certificates of ` 4223.56 crore

(41 per cent) were pending as on 2 February 2017.

(Paragraph 3.8.6)


xii

4. Performance Audit

Utilisation of Grants under Civic Amenities Head (State Plan) By

Nagar Nigams

The Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar

released grants to the Nagar Nigams under State Plan head during the period

2011-16 for providing civic amenities such as construction of parks, Bus

stand/Bus stop, construction of ghat, infrastructure development in slums,

construction of community hall, construction of guest house/town hall, traffic

lights/public conveniences and special sanitation.

During Performance Audit it was noticed that:

Utilisation of funds Audit observed that 55 per cent of the total grants received by Nagar Nigams

were transferred to Parallel/Parastatal Bodies such as Bihar Urban

Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., Bihar Urban Development

Agency etc. which are formed due to poor staffing and technical incapability

of the Urban Local Bodies for performing various functions of Municipality.

Thus, more than 50 per cent of works for civic amenities were executed

without involving the ULBs.

(Paragraph 4.1.7.1)

In four test checked Nagar Nigams, grants amounting to ` 48.19 crore were

not utilised for a period ranging from one to seven years as required land was

not made available.

(Paragraph 4.1.7.2)

Construction of Parks

GoB released grants of ` 11.56 crore for construction of 17 parks under Nagar

Nigam Patna during 2009-16. Of this, 10 parks were completed with an

expenditure of ` 10.08 crore whereas seven parks remained incomplete as of

August 2016.

Audit physically verified six parks and found that two parks constructed at a

cost of ` 51.25 lakh were locked, filthy and not put to use.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.1)

Construction of bus stands and bus queue shelters With a view to provide better infrastructure to urban population, GoB

mandated Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. for

development of bus stands/bus que shelters throughout the State. During

2011-16, GoB released ` 26.24 crore to BUIDCO through four test checked

Nagar Nigams for construction of bus stand/bus queue shelters. Out of this,

` 18.74 crore was released for construction of five bus stands in the test

checked Nagar Nigams.

However, two works were in progress whereas three works were not started as

of August 2016. Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd

failed to start the construction of three bus stands despite availability of

` 12.73 crore since March 2013 to November 2014 as land was not made

available by two Nagar Nigams and administrative approvals for Inter State

Bus Terminal, Patna were not received from GoB.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.2)

Overview

xiii

Construction/renovation/beautification of Pond/Ghat

GoB released (October 2010) ` 80 lakh for beautification/renovation of

Kagwali Pond under Nagar Nigam, Gaya. The work to be completed by

February 2012, could not be started in time due to dispute at the work site and

was started in June 2012 only. The work was neither completed by the

contractor nor any action was initiated against him by Nagar Nigam, Gaya

(August 2016).

(Paragraph 4.1.8.3)

Infrastructure Development in Slums

GoB sanctioned (December 2013 and July 2014) ` 45.25 crore to Bihar Urban

Development Agency for infrastructure development in slums under four

sampled Nagar Nigams.

Audit observed that out of 4,488 individual toilets planned (2014), only 1,548

toilets were completed in the first phase and despite availability of ` 1.87

crore, 2,940 toilets were not constructed by the Nagar Nigams and people of

the selected households were compelled to continue with the open defecation.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.4)

Construction of Community Halls

An amount of ` three crore was released (December 2011) to District Urban

Development Agency, Gaya for Construction/Extension/Renovation of four

Community Halls in test checked Nagar Nigams. However, construction of

two Community Halls remained incomplete/not commenced as of August

2016 due to dispute at worksite of Azad Park Community Hall and the tender

for the Hall at Maa Bageshwari Temple Gaya was not invited (August 2016).

(Paragraph 4.1.8.5)

Construction of Town Halls Grants released under construction of Samrat Ashok Bhawan (Town Hall)

were lapsed as the moneys were not drawn from the treasury. Though, the

Municipal Commissioner was responsible for drawl of grants from the

treasury, no records were available to indicate that such a monitoring was

done by the Municipal Commissioner.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.6)

Construction of public conveniences

GoB allotted (January 2010) ` 5.94 crore to Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Ltd

(BRPNNL) for construction of 32 numbers of public conveniences at different

locations in Patna at ` 18.54 lakh each. Subsequently, these conveniences

were to be handed over to Nagar Nigam Patna to enhance its source of

income. All the 32 public conveniences were constructed during the period

November to December 2009. However, 10 were not handed over to Nagar

Nigam Patna even after a lapse of more than six years of its construction.

These 10 public conveniences were physically verified by Audit and it was

found that nine were not in use since construction and the one at Indira Gandhi

Institute of Medical Sciences campus was being used and maintained by the

hospital which was also confirmed during beneficiary survey of 177

beneficiaries.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.7)


xiv

Special Sanitation The grants for comprehensive improvement in sanitation across the municipal

area were to be utilised on six components viz., door-to-door waste collection,

purchase of equipment for collection of waste, purchase/development of

landfill sites for waste management, assistance in generation of

compost/electricity from the waste, de-silting, cleaning and consolidation of

drains and providing manpower for special sanitation drive of public places.

Audit observed that two test checked Nagar Nigams incurred an expenditure

of ` 10.56 crore out of total grants of ` 20.60 crore during 2015-16 on

components other than the prescribed ones such as salary of regular sanitation

staff, daily wages of sanitation staff, night sanitation, purchase of aprons etc.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.8)

Planning The Development Plan for providing Civic Amenities was not prepared by the

test checked Nagar Nigams and development works executed by them were

not the part of district plan prepared by District Planning Committees.

(Paragraph 4.1.6.1)

5. Compliance Audits

Nagar Parishad Sultanganj made irregular payment of ` 50 lakh on training

component of Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana, due to lack of

observance of Scheme guidelines. In eight ULBs, NGOs failed to provide

employment to trained beneficiaries despite an expenditure of ` 3.91 crore

over their training.

(Paragraph 5.1)

Annual Rental Value of holdings was not revised by minimum 15 per cent

every five years and Property Tax was levied at a rate below the prescribed

minimum rate which led to a loss of tax revenue of ` 36.56 lakh.

(Paragraph 5.2)

Relevant financial rules were not observed by Nagar Parishad, Siwan in

payment of advance for maintenance of solar lights which led to irregular

payment of ` 80.87 lakh to the agency.

(Paragraph 5.3)

Chapter - I

An Overview of the Functioning of the Panchayati Raj Institutions

in Bihar

1.1 Introduction

The Seventy-Third Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 gave constitutional

status to the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and established a system of

uniform structure, elections, reservation of seats for Schedule Caste/Tribes and

women and devolution of fund, functions and functionaries to PRIs. The PRIs

aim to promote participation of people and effective implementation of rural

development schemes for economic development and social justice in various

areas including those in relation to the matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule

of the Constitution.

Consequently, the Government of Bihar (GoB) enacted the Bihar Panchayat

Raj Act (BPRA), 1993 (subsequently replaced by the BPRA, 2006) and

established a three-tier system of PRIs viz., Gram Panchayat (GP) at village

level, Panchayat Samiti (PS) at block level and Zila Parishad (ZP) at the district

level to enable them to function as institutions of self-government. As of March

2016, there are 8,969 PRIs1 having 1,35,725 elected representatives in the

State. The last general election to the elected bodies of PRIs was held during

April-May 2016.

1.2 State Profile

Bihar is the thirteenth largest State in the country with an area of 94,163 sq.

km. and constitutes 2.86 per cent of total geographical area of the country. The

population growth in Bihar in the last decade was 25.4 per cent. The rural

population in the State was 9.23 crore (89 per cent) out of total population of

10.41 crore. The comparative demographic and development statistics of the

State are given in Table 1.1 below:

Table - 1.1: Important statistics of the State

Indicators Unit State

Value

National

Value

Rank amongst

all States

Population Crore 10.41 121.09 3

Population Density Per sq. km. 1,106 382 1

Rural Population Crore 9.23 83.31 2

Gender Ratio 1000 males 918 943 23

Literacy Per cent 61.80 74.04 29

Number of districts Number 38 686 3

Number of PRIs Number 8,969 2,56,116 11

Human Development

Index (HDI), 2011

Value 0.447 0.504 18

Decadal growth rate Per cent 25.42 17.64 3

(Source: Census 2011, Thirteenth Finance Commission Report, Planning Commission Report,

Government of India and United Nations Development Programme Report 2011)

1 38 ZPs, 534 PSs and 8,397 GPs


2

The position of PRIs in Bihar in terms of number, average area and average

population is given in Table 1.2 below:

Table - 1.2: Position of PRIs

Level of PRIs Number Average Area per

PRIs (Sq. Km.)

Average Population

(in lakh)

As per 2011 Census

Zila Parishad 38 2,427.83 24.30

Panchayat Samiti 534 172.77 1.73

Gram Panchayat 8,397 10.99 0.11

(Source: Website of Planning and Development Department, Bihar)

1.3 Organisational set-up

At the State level, Panchayati Raj Department (PRD) co-ordinates and monitors

the functioning of PRIs. The ZP is headed by the Adhyaksha, while the PS and

the GP are headed by the Pramukh and the Mukhiya respectively who are

elected representatives of the respective PRIs.

The Deputy Development Commissioner (DDC) and the Block Development

Officer (BDO) are the executive heads of the ZP and the PS respectively. The

Panchayat Secretary is in-charge of the office of the GP and is also responsible

for maintenance of accounts and records at GP level. The organisational

structure of PRIs is depicted in Chart - 1.1 & 1.2 below:

Chart – 1.1: Elected Bodies

The Minister, Panchayati Raj

Gram Panchayat Zila Parishad Panchayat Samiti

Mukhiya Pramukh Adhyaksha

Up-Mukhiya Up-Pramukh Up-Adhyaksha

Members Members Members

Chapter – I: An overview of functioning of the Panchayati Raj Institutions in Bihar

3

Chart – 1.2: Administrative set-up

(Source: BPRA, 2006 and www.biharprd.bih.nic.in)

1.4 Functioning of PRIs

1.4.1 Powers and Functions of PRIs

Articles 243G and 243H of the Constitution of India stipulate that the

Legislature of a State may, by law, endow the PRIs with the following powers,

authority and responsibilities:

• preparation of plans for economic development and social justice;

• implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice

as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in

the Eleventh Schedule of the Constitution; and

• powers to impose taxes and constitute funds for crediting all moneys of

the panchayats.

Besides, Section 22, 47 and 73 of the BPRA, 2006 describe the nature of power

and duties to be performed by the GPs, PSs and ZPs respectively.

1.4.2 Powers of the State Government

The BPRA, 2006 entrusts the State Government with following powers to

enable it to monitor proper functioning of the PRIs. A brief summary of powers

and roles of the State Government in respect of PRIs is given in Table 1.3

below:

Principal Secretary/Secretary, PRD

Director, PRD

Panchayat Samiti Gram Panchayat Zila Parishad

DDC-cum-Chief

Executive Officer

BDO-cum-Executive

Officer

Panchayat

Secretary


4

Table - 1.3: Powers of the State Government

Authority Powers of the State Government

Section 146 Power to frame rules: The State Government may, by notification in

Official Gazette, make rules to carry out functions as specified in

BPRA, 2006, subject to approval by the State Legislature.

Section 150,

152 and 153

Power to make model Regulations, Inquiry and Inspection: The

State Government may make standard rules for the purposes of the

BPRA, 2006 and has the power to inspect any office or records under

the control of the PRIs.

Section 167 District Planning Committee: The State Government shall constitute

in every district a District Planning Committee to consolidate plans

prepared by the Panchayats and the Municipalities in the district and to

prepare a Draft Development Plan for the district as a whole.

Section 168 Finance Commission for Panchayats: The State Government shall

constitute in every five year, a Finance Commission to review the

financial position of PRIs, and to make recommendations for devolution

of funds and measures to improve the financial position of PRIs.

Section 27,

55 and 82

Taxation: The PRIs may impose taxes on holdings, professions and

levy tolls, fees and rates subject to the maximum rates notified by the

State Government.

Section 172 Removal of difficulties: If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the

provisions of the Act, the State Government, may by order, do anything

necessary to remove the difficulty.

Section

18(5), 44(4)

and 70 (5)

Removal from post: The State Government may remove Mukhiya/Up-

Mukhiya, Pramukh/Up-Pramukh and Adhyaksha/Upadhayksha from

their post on the ground of absence from the meeting, lack in performing

duties as per BPRA, 2006, misusing their powers and convicted and

absconded for more than six months after giving them opportunity to

represent themselves.

(Source: BPRA, 2006)

1.4.3 Devolution of Functions, Funds and Functionaries to PRIs

The Seventy-third Constitutional Amendment Act envisaged that all

29 functions along with funds and functionaries mentioned in the Eleventh

Schedule of the Constitution would be eventually transferred to the PRIs

through suitable legislation of the State Government.

Devolution of Functions

Twenty departments of GoB transferred their respective functions to the PRIs

as of January 2017. The PRIs were entrusted 621 types of responsibilities by

various departments of GoB from time to time which include selection of

beneficiaries, financial powers, preparation of plans, construction of

infrastructure, management of programmes, monitoring works, maintenance of

assets etc. A meeting (July 2014) of all the Principal Secretaries/Secretaries of

GoB decided to frame Operational Guidelines for effective devolution of

powers to PRIs. In first phase 12 Departments were selected for framing the

Operational Guidelines. However, only two departments framed the

Operational Guidelines (January 2017). The Fifth State Finance Commission

(Fifth SFC) observed (February 2016) that the progress so far on Department

wise and subject wise activity mapping was unsatisfactory and Parastatal

Bodies (PBs) were also carrying the functions of PRIs.


5

Devolution of Funds

No taxes were levied and collected by the PRIs as of January 2017 despite

recommendation of the Fourth State Finance Commission (Fourth SFC) and

provisions of the BPRA, 2006 as the State Government did not notify the rate

of taxes. The Monitoring Officer, PRD stated (January 2017) that framing of

Regulation for taxation by PRIs is under process.

Untied grants were made available to three levels of PRIs under Fourteenth

Finance Commission (FFC), Fifth SFC and Rajeev Gandhi Panchayat

Sashaktikaran Yojana (RGPSY) during 2015-16. Backward Region Grant Fund

(BRGF) was delinked from the support of the Central Government from 2015-

16. As per Fifth SFC report, funds available to the PRIs from various sources

were grossly inadequate for their assigned functions. Further, they were not

able to utilise even the allocated funds due to capacity constraints viz., serious

deficiencies in skilled manpower, office space, IT facility, equipment etc.

Devolution of Functionaries

The ZPs in the State did not have adequate staff to discharge the devolved

functions and 79 per cent2 of sanctioned posts were vacant as of January 2017.

In two ZPs3, men-in-position was less than 10 per cent of sanctioned strength.

At GP level, 3,160 posts of the Panchayat Secretary (38 per cent of the total

8,397 posts) were vacant as of 31 March 2016. The Fifth SFC while observing

the acute shortage of staff at all levels of PRIs, recommended a revised staffing

pattern, which was not followed as of December 2016.

1.5 Formation of various Committees

The BPRA, 2006 provides that PRIs shall constitute the various committees by

election from among its members for effective discharge of its function.

1.5.1 Standing Committees

As per Sections 25, 50 and 77 of BPRA, 2006, the PRIs shall constitute various

Standing Committees for performance of the assigned functions. Standing

Committees to be constituted at three-tier PRIs is given in Table 1.4 below:

Table - 1.4: Standing Committees

Committees GP PS ZP

General Standing Committee No Yes Yes

Planning, Co-ordination & Finance Committee/ Finance, Audit &

Planning Committee

Yes Yes Yes

Production Committee Yes Yes Yes

Social Justice Committee Yes Yes Yes

Education Committee Yes Yes Yes

Committee on Public Health, Family Welfare & Rural Sanitation Yes Yes Yes

Public Works Committee Yes Yes Yes

(Source: Section 25, 50 and 77 of BPRA 2006)

2 Total Sanctioned strength - 3,974; Men-in-position - 844; Vacancy - 3,130

3 Buxar and Supaul


6

1.5.2 District Planning Committee

Article 243ZD of the Constitution of India and Section 167 of the BPRA, 2006,

envisage formation of a District Planning Committee (DPC) to consolidate the

plans prepared by both the Panchayats and the Municipalities in the district and

to prepare a draft development plan for the district as a whole. Further, the

Chairperson of every DPC shall forward the development plan as recommended

by such Committee to the State Government.

Though, the DPCs were constituted by all the districts of the State, Fifth SFC

observed that planning was limited only to BRGF scheme and Finance

Commission funds due to lack of cooperation of the line departments and low

capacity of PRIs and DPCs to plan. Thus, the purposes of the Article 243ZD

and provisions made in BPRA, 2006 were only partially fulfilled.

1.6 Audit Arrangements

1.6.1 Primary Auditor

Sections 31, 59 and 86 of BPRA, 2006 (amended in May 2011) provide for

audit of GP, PS and ZP respectively by the Comptroller and Auditor General

(CAG) of India or its authorised authority and a copy of the Report will be

forwarded to respective PRIs within a month from the date of completion of

audit.

GoB declared (2006) the Examiner of Local Accounts (ELA), Bihar as the

prescribed ‘authority’ for audit of PRIs. Accordingly, audit of the accounts of

PRIs in Bihar was conducted by the ELA as primary auditor under the

supervision of the Accountant General (Audit), Bihar, as per provisions of the

Bihar and Orissa Local Fund Audit (LFA) Act, 1925.

During 2015-16, out of 8,969 PRIs in the State, audit of 1,102 PRIs was

conducted by ELA under AG (Audit), Bihar. Besides, audit of PRIs was also

conducted by the Directorate of Local Fund Audit (DLFA) constituted by

Finance Department, GoB without overlapping the units audited by ELA.

Details of audit conducted by ELA, office of AG (Audit) and by DLFA of GoB

are given in Table 1.5 below:

Table 1.5 Status of audit conducted by ELA, AG (Audit) and DLFA, GoB

PRIs Total No. of

units

No. of units

audited by ELA

No. of units

audited by DLFA

No. of reports received from

DLFA to AG (Audit) for

guidance

ZPs 38 38 11 4

PSs 534 158 19 4

GPs 8397 906 97 6

Total 8969 1102 127 14

(Source: information furnished by DLFA and Inspection Reports at ELA office)

During 2015-16, DLFA conducted audit of 127 PRIs4. Out of these, reports

of 14 PRIs were received (September 2015) in the office of the ELA for

guidance and comments on these reports were communicated to DLFA in

December 2015.

4 ZP - 11, PS - 19 and GP - 97


7

1.6.2 Audit by Comptroller and Auditor General of India

Thirteenth Finance Commission (Th FC) while emphasizing the

recommendations of Eleventh Finance Commission regarding audit of

panchayats by the CAG of India had recommended that the CAG must be

entrusted with Technical Guidance and Support (TGS) over the audit of all the

LBs at every tier and his Annual Technical Inspection Report as well as Annual

Report of DLFA must be placed before the State Legislature. The Fourteenth

FC had also recommended that the initiatives made by the previous Finance

Commissions regarding improvement in maintenance of accounts of LBs and

their audit under TGS arrangement by the CAG should be continued.

Consequently, GoB notified (June 2015) the establishment of DLFA and its

functioning since 11 June 2015. The Finance Department intimated (December

2015) that GoB had accepted the Standard Terms and Conditions under

Regulations on Audit and Accounts, 2007 for audit of LBs under TGS

arrangement. Audit under TGS arrangement commenced from December 2016.

1.7 Response to Audit Observations

1.7.1 Poor response to Inspection Reports

After completion of audit, Inspection Reports (IRs) containing audit findings

were issued to the PRIs concerned with a copy to the State Government. The

CEOs of the ZPs, the EOs of PSs and the Mukhiyas of GPs were required to

respond to observations contained in the IRs and send compliance report to the

ELA within three months. But, status of compliance of audit paras outstanding

was not satisfactory as evident from increasing number of paragraphs

outstanding as on 31 March 2016. Details of paragraphs outstanding for the last

five years (2011-16) are given in Table 1.6 and Chart – 1.3 below:

Table – 1.6: Outstanding paragraphs in PRIs for the last five years

Year No. of

IRs

No. of

paras in

IRs

Amount

involved

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

No. of

paras

settled

Amount of

settlement

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

No. of paras

outstanding

Money

value of

paras

outstanding

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (3-5) 8 (4-6)

2011-12 518 5447 117.15 3020 0.54 2427 116.61

2012-13 416 7449 92.80 3163 0.44 4286 92.36

2013-14 503 8748 128.12 3487 0.00 5261 128.12

2014-15 574 8528 99.14 4056 59.91 4472 39.23

2015-16 1454 18586 339.01 6207 0.01 12379 338.99

Total 3465 48758 776.22 19933 60.90 28825 715.31

(Source: Inspection reports of LBs)


8

Chart – 1.3

It was evident from the Table 1.6 and Chart – 1.3 above that a large number of

paragraphs remained outstanding during 2011-16. Out of total 48,758 audit

paragraphs only 19,933 (41 per cent) paragraphs were settled and

28,825 paragraphs involving ` 715.31 crore were remained outstanding as

of 31 March 2016.

The high number of outstanding old IRs and paragraphs therein and its

increasing trend indicated weak internal controls in PRIs.

1.7.2 Compliance to the ELA’s Annual Audit Reports

The Finance Department, GoB had constituted (March 2010) three-tier

Committees – High Level, Departmental Level and District Level for review/

compliance of the ELA’s Annual Audit Reports. The District Level

Committee5 had the responsibility to ensure compliance of audit paragraphs/

reports received from PRIs and ULBs of that district. The Department Level

Committee6 had to review the status of compliance made by the District Level

Committees. The High Level Committee7 had to meet once in six months to

review the functioning of District and Department Level Committees.

It was observed that seven District Level Committee meetings were held for

PRIs during 2015-2016 and only one Department Level Committee meeting

was held in July 2015 whereas, High Level Committee meeting was not held

since August 2013. Thus, the purpose of constituting three-tier Committees was

defeated.

1.7.3 Status of Local Bodies Report

Sections 31(4), 59(4) and 86(4) of the BPR (Amendment) Act, 2011 stipulate

that the Annual Report of the CAG of India or an authority authorised by him

shall be laid before both the houses of the State Legislature. The Annual Audit

5 Headed by the District Magistrate/Deputy Development Commissioner

6 Headed by the Principal Secretary/Secretary of the Panchayati Raj Department, GoB 7 Headed by the Principal Secretary to the Finance Department, GoB and the Pr. A.G.

(Audit), Bihar as a member


9

Reports of ELA’s on LBs for the year ended March 2013 and March 2014 were

placed before State Legislature on 11 March 2016. But, arrangement for

discussion of the ELA’s report had not been made till January 2017.

The first CAG’s report on LBs, Government of Bihar for the year ended

March 2016 was laid before both the houses of State Legislature on

4 April 2016 and GoB decided to discuss the report in Public Accounts

Committee (PAC) which discussed four paragraphs (December 2016) of the

report but no observations were settled for want of proper reply from the

department concerned.

Accountability Mechanism and Financial Reporting Issue

1.8 Accountability Mechanism

1.8.1 Lok Prahari (Ombudsman)

As per Section 152(5) of BPRA 2006, Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) is to be

appointed by the State Government for Panchayats and Gram Kutchahary.

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS)

guidelines also provide appointment of a Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) for the

period of two years extendable by one year on satisfactory performance or up to

age of 65 years whichever is earlier and establishment of its office for redressal

of complaints under MGNREGS to ensure transparency and responsibility.

However, Draft Bihar Local Government Ombudsman Rules 2011 for

appointment of Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) for Panchayats and Gram

Kutchahary was not finalized. Therefore, Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) for PRIs

was not appointed by PRD as of January 2017.

Regarding Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) for MGNREGS, Rural Development

Department (RDD) informed (November 2016) that Ombudsman was working

in 23 districts and in remaining 15 districts, appointment was in process.

Thus, the complaints regarding Schemes (other than MGNREGS) were not

addressed by Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) as envisaged in the BPRA, 2006.

1.8.2 Social Audit

The basic objective of Social Audit is to ensure public accountability in the

implementation of projects, laws and policies.

GoB had sanctioned constitution of an independent Social Audit Committee

with 69 different posts (July 2015) to conduct Social Audit of works under

MGNREGS. As per information furnished by the RDD, GoB during the

year 2015-16, 3544 Social Audits were conducted in 2,100 GPs by respective

Gram Sabhas. These Social Audits were mainly facilitated by the functionaries

of MGNREGS and the Gram Sabhas were conducted in presence of an

observer assigned by the District Administration.

The Secretary RDD replied (June 2016) that Social Audit reports were lying

with the GPs and districts and the State had not received any Social Audit

report as there was no such arrangement in the State as of now.


10

Commissioner, MGNREGS instructed (July 2013) all the DM cum District

Program Coordinators of the State to adopt the Standard Operating Procedure

formulated by the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD), GoI for

preparation of Social Audit reports of GPs from 2013-14.

Accordingly, Social Audit reports for the period 2013-16 were prepared by the

GPs in the prescribed format and uploaded in the website of the MoRD.

1.8.3 Submission of Utilisation Certificates

As per instruction of GoB read with provisions contained in Section 342 of

Bihar Financial Rules (BFR), time limit for submission of Utilisation

Certificates (UCs) for the grants sanctioned for specific purposes was 18

months from the date of allotment of the grants. It was noticed that the PRD

had released grants of ` 14,025.96 crore to PRIs during 2007-08 to 2015-16

under Th FC, Mukhya Mantri Gramodaya Yojana (MMGY), Fourth SFC,

Furniture and Equipment head etc. But, the UCs for only ` 7,101.25 crore

(50.62 per cent) were submitted by the PRIs as of July 2016. Details are given

in the Table 1.7 below:

Table – 1.7: Submission of Utilisation certificates by PRIs for funds

alloted during 2007-16

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

Sl.

No.

Head Total

Allotment

period UCs

submitted

UCs not

submitted

Percentage

of UCs

submitted

1. Th FC 4810.74 2010-11 to

2014-15

2676.41 2134.33 56

2. MMGY 267.70 2012-13 to

2014-15

43 224.70 16

3. Fourth SFC 2118.61 2011-12 to

2014-15

1016.95 1101.66 48

4. Allowance to PRIs

member

492.46 2008-09 to

2015-16

10.30 482.16 2

5. Furniture & equipment

for Gram Kutchahary

14.00 2008-09 to

2015-16

Nil 14.00 Nil

6. RGPSA 83.71 2013-14 to

2014-15

4.71 79.00 6

7. IT cell under BRGF 9.26 2013-14 to

2014-15

5.48 3.78 59

8. BRGF Basic Grant 3960.30 2007-08 to

2014-15

3140.46 819.84 79

9. Fourteenth FC 2269.18 2015-16 203.94 2065.24 8.99

Total 14025.96 7101.25 6924.71 50.62

(Source: Information provided by the PRD, GoB)

UCs of ` 6,924.71 crore were not submitted for periods ranging from one years

to eight years and utilisation percentage ranged between two to seventy nine

per cent except for grants under Furniture and Equipment head for which no

utilisation was submitted. This indicated weak internal control and possible

misutilisation of funds.


11

1.8.4 Utilisation of grants under major Centrally Sponsored Schemes

Details of utilisation of grants under major Centrally Sponsored Schemes

(CSSs) are given in Table 1.8 below:

Table - 1.8: Utilisation of grants under major CSSs (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Sl.

No.

Grant /

Scheme

Year Fund

Available

Utilisation Percentage of

Utilisation

1. MGNREGS 2011-12 2566.45 1668.69 65

2012-13 2377.68 1971.13 83

2013-14 2344.22 2038.48 87

2014-15 1374.24 1090.88 79

2015-16 1897.31 1606.16 85

2. BRGF 2011-12 1172.08 457.88 39

2012-13 1179.82 546.34 46

2013-14 1162.36 786.80 68

2014-15 740.00 280.23 38

3 RGPSY 2013-14 8.61 2.30 27

2014-15 81.43# 2.41 3

2015-16 79.00 Nil Nil

(Source: Annual Reports of RDD, GoB; data provided by the PRD and RDD, GoB)

Note: BRGF was delinked from the support of the Central Government w.e.f. 2015-16.

# includes State share of ` 20.58 crore.

The utilisation under BRGF decreased from 68 per cent (2013-14) to

38 per cent (2014-15). The Monitoring Officer, PRD replied (October 2016)

that the percentage of utilisation had improved to 81 per cent as of August

2016. The status of utilisation of RGPSA ranged between three to twenty seven

per cent during 2013-15 while no utilisation was submitted for the grant

received during 2015-16.

1.9 Financial Reporting Issues

1.9.1 Source of Funds

1.9.1.1 Sources of Finances

The resource base of PRIs consists of own revenue generated by collection of

tax and non-tax revenues, devolution of funds as per recommendations of State

and Central Finance Commission, Central and State Government grants for

maintenance and development purposes and other receipts. As per Sections 27,

55 and 82 of BPRA, 2006, the PRIs may impose taxes on holdings, professions

and levy tolls, fees and rates subject to a maximum rates notified by the State

Government. A flow chart of sources of finances of PRIs is depicted in the

Chart 1.4 below:


12

Chart – 1.4: Source of Finances

(Source: Section 27, 55 and 82 of BPRA, 2006)

But, the PRIs did not have any own tax revenue as the State Government had

not yet notified the maximum rates of taxes, tolls and fees etc., as of January

2017. Of the three level of PRIs only the ZPs had some own non-tax revenue

from rent of shops/Inspection Bungalow, leasing of ponds/bus-stand etc.,

whereas PSs and GPs did not have any revenue from own sources. However,

framing of Regulations for collection of taxes by PRIs was under process at the

State level.

1.9.1.2 Fund Flow arrangement of Centrally/State Sponsored Schemes

Fund Flow arrangement for major Centrally/State Sponsored Schemes is given

in Table 1.9 below:

Table-1.9: Fund Flow arrangement of Centrally/State sponsored schemes

(Source: Scheme Guidelines and allotment letters of GoB)

Sl.

No.

Name of

Scheme

Fund flow arrangement

1. MGNREGS An electronic Fund Management System (e-FMS), has been introduced in

MGNREGS. Under this system, funds are held at one account at the State level

(e-FMS Debit account) which is electronically linked to all implementing levels. The

implementing agency after due verification of the work and the muster rolls,

generates an electronic Fund Transfer Order (FTO) to transfer the wages direct into

the beneficiary accounts duly debiting the State level account.

2. Fourteenth

FC

Grants shall be released in two instalments in June and October every year which

must be transferred to the GPs within 15 days of receipt from the Central

Government. The amount of grant was to be transferred directly into account of GPs.

3. Fifth SFC The Fifth SFC grants will be released directly into the bank account of PRIs

concerned through electronic fund transfer and core banking system. For the year

2015-16, grant is to be released in one instalment based on Revised/Actuals of

2014-15. In the subsequent year, first allocation of 50 per cent of the devolved funds

would be released in April and second instalment by October of the year based upon

RE/Actuals of previous year subject to the submission of account of the previous

year.

4 RGPSY This is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme and fund sharing between Central and State

government was in the ratio of 75:25. At the State level, Officer on Special Duty

(OSD) of the PRD is the Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO) for drawing the

funds and make available to training providers agencies. At the district level, DDC

cum CEO of the ZP is the DDO for utilising the funds for providing human

resources to PRIs, capacity building, institutional infrastructure etc.

Revenue Sources of PRIs

Grants

Non-Tax

Revenue

Tax

Revenue

Property

Taxes

Establishment

Grant

Central/State

Finance

Commission

Grant

Own Revenue

Toll, fees

and rates

Grants for

implementation

of schemes


13

1.9.1.3 State Budget allocation vis-à-vis expenditure

The budget provisions of State Government to PRIs including State share

towards GoI schemes and grants received under recommendations by Central

Finance Commissions (CFCs) for the year 2011-16 is given in Table 1.10

below:

Table-1.10: Budget allocation vis-à-vis expenditure (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Particulars Head 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (3 to 7)

1. Budgetary

Allocation

Revenue 3299.79 3276.75 4074.14 4709.01 5465.11 20824.80

Capital 250.00 250.00 0.00 100.50 2.00 602.50

Total 3549.79 3526.75 4074.14 4809.51 5467.11 21427.30

2. Expenditure Revenue 2179.80 2591.06 3003.35 2374.78 2893.01 13041.42

Capital 210.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 210.31

Total 2389.53 2591.06 3003.35 2374.78 2893.01 13251.73

3. Savings (1-2) 1160.26 935.69 1070.79 2434.73 2574.10 8175.57

4. Percentage of savings 33 27 26 51 47 38

(Source: Appropriation Accounts of Government of Bihar)

It is evident from Table 1.10 above that the PRD could not utilise budgetary

allocation fully and percentage of savings ranged between 26 per cent and

51 per cent during 2011-16. Total allocation under Capital head was less than

three per cent of the total allocation during 2011-16 while capital expenditure

during 2012-16 was nil.

1.9.2 Recommendations of the State Finance Commission

In terms of Article 243-I of the Constitution of India and as per provisions

contained in Section 168 of the BPRA, 2006, GoB had constituted State Finance

Commissions8 to assess the financial status and to determine the principles on

the basis of which adequate financial resources would be ensured to the LBs.

Of the total 17 recommendations of the Fourth SFC whose tenure ended

in 2014-15, implementation of three recommendations9 were pending till

31 March 2016.

The Fifth SFC was constituted in December 2013 for the period 2015-20 and

its report was due on 31 March 2015 that was however submitted

(2 February 2016) with a delay of 10 months.

As per recommendations of the Fifth SFC, two types of amount (i) share of net

tax revenue of the State (ii) amount in shape of grants are to be released to the

PRIs to be spent on water supply, sanitation, smart panchayat, e-governance,

Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan etc. The amount was to be distributed among GPs,

PSs and ZPs in the ratio of 70:10:20 respectively. GoB had made provision of

8 First SFC - April 1994, Second SFC - June 1999, Third SFC - July 2004, Fourth SFC -

June 2007 and Fifth SFC - December 2013 9 ZPs to become financially self-reliant by raising own resources; State Government to

notify maximum limit of taxes to enable the PRIs to raise resources and Accounting

format and accounting manual prescribed by the CAG to be used.


14

` 1,822.88 crore to be released to PRIs during 2015-16 but grants were not

released till January 2017.

1.9.3 Recommendations of the Central Finance Commission

Article 280(3)(bb) and 280(3)(c) of the Constitution of India mandate the

Finance Commission to recommend measures to augment the Consolidate Fund

of a State to supplement the resource of Panchayats and Municipalities.

Thirteenth Finance Commission

The Th FC recommended grants-in-aid to the LBs as a percentage of the

previous years’ pool of taxes over and above the share of the States. GoB

received allotment of ` 4,810.74 crore for the period 2010-15 and out of this,

the PRIs could utilised only ` 2,676.41 crore (56 per cent) leaving unspent

balance of ` 2,134.33 crore as of July 2016. As per recommendation of the Th

FC, grants were to be released to PRIs within 15 days from receipt of grants

from GoI failing which penal interest for the delays beyond 15 days was to be

paid by the State Government from own resources to PRIs. It was observed that

Performance Grant amounting to ` 167.75 crore was released by the GoI on

31 March 2015 for the period 2014-15 and GoB sanctioned the grants to PRIs

on 6 April 2015 but the same was released to the PRIs (2 September 2015) with

delays of 133 days. As a result, GoB incurred avoidable liability in shape of

penal interest of ` 4.43 crore.

Fourteenth Finance Commission

The Fourteenth FC recommended grants in two parts- (i) Basic Grant

(ii) Performance Grant for duly constituted GPs and Municipalities during

award period of 2015-20. Grants to be released every year in two installment

(June and October). In the case of GPs, 90 per cent of the grant will be the

Basic Grant and 10 per cent will be the Performance Grant. Entitlement of

Performance Grant may be from the second year of award period i.e., from

2016-17 onwards.

Entitlement of Basic Grant to GoB for the period 2015-20 was ` 18,916.05

crore and Performance Grant for the period 2016-20 was ` 2,101.78 crore.

Against the entitlement of ` 2,269.18 crore of Basic Grant for the period

2015-16, GoB received full amount but second installment received with a

delay of five months. Though, the first instalment for the period 2016-17 was

due in June 2016, the same was released to PRIs (December 2016) with a delay

of six months.

1.9.4 Maintenance of Records

1.9.4.1 Budget

As per Rule 14 of the Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads (Budget and

Account) Rules, 1964, the annual budget estimates of the ZPs are to be

prepared on the basis of the average of its last three years’ actuals of income

and expenditure. The budget of ZP is to be approved by the Parishad not later


15

than 20 February. The budget so prepared and approved by the Parishad shall

be sent to the State Government before 1 March. Further, Rule 16 prohibits the

ZP from incurring expenditure without budget provisions.

Scrutiny of records of 10 test checked ZPs10

revealed that five ZPs11

did not

prepare budget for the period 2015-16, whereas, in remaining five ZPs, budget

for the year 2015-16 was passed by the respective Parishads with a delay of

three to eleven months. Of the five ZPs that prepared budget, ZP Banka did not

submit the passed budget to the State Government as of July 2016 whereas ZPs

Munger, Nalanda and West Champaran submitted their budget to the State

Government with a delay of four to nine months.

The ZPs Kishanganj, Muzaffarpur and Purnea replied (June –September 2016)

that due to shortage of staff, budget could not be prepared. ZP Gopalganj

replied (June 2016) that format of budget and guidelines for preparation of

budget were not made available by the Department/Government and ZP

Samastipur replied (July 2016) that budget was being prepared for the year

2016-17.

Incurring expenditure without budget is not a healthy financial practice as it

undermines the importance of prioritisation of resources, besides diluting the

exercise of control over receipt and expenditure. High Level Committee at

State level had directed the PRD to prepare the Budget and Accounts Rules for

PRIs by September 2013 but the preparation of rules was under process as of

January 2017.

1.9.4.2 Maintenance of records

Rule 40 of Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads (Budget and Account)

Rules, 1964 prescribes maintenance of basic records, registers and accounts for

transparency and accountability.

Scrutiny of records (2015-16) revealed that out of 38 ZPs in the State, six test

checked ZPs did not maintain key records12

such as Grant Register, Asset

Register, Daily Collection Register, and Cashier’s Cash Book etc. Further, out

of 8931 PSs and GPs in the State, 1064 test checked PSs and GPs did not

maintain the key records. Failure to maintain key records could lead to

deficient monitoring and actual financial position of the audited entities was not

ascertainable in audit. CEO, ZPs replied that due to shortage of manpower,

records were not maintained.

1.9.4.3 Annual Accounts

Rule 94 of Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads (Budget and Account)

Rules, 1964 stipulates that as soon as possible after close of the year and not

later than the 15 April, the total of the receipts and expenditure of the year shall

be posted in the prescribed formats of Annual Accounts.

10 Banka, Buxer, Gopalganj, Kishanganj, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Nalanda, Purnea,,

Samastipur and West Champaran 11

Gopalganj, Kishanganj, Muzaffarpur, Purnea and Samastipur

12

Asset Register-Buxer, Patna, Rohtas, West Champaran; Cashier Cash Book - West

Champaran; Daily Collection Register - Munger and Rohtas; Grant Register - Buxer,

Nalanda, Patna, Rohtas, Samastipur and West Champaran; Stock register - Rohtas;

Advance Ledger-Buxer, Rohtas and West Champaran.


16

However, Annual Accounts were not prepared by the seven13

out of 38 test

checked ZPs for the year 2015-16. As a result, head-wise receipts as well as

expenditure were not ascertainable and its comparing with budget estimate was

also not possible.

1.9.5 Reconciliation of Balances

As per Rule 80(a) to (d) of Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads

(Budget and Account) Rules, 1964, at the end of each month, a statement

indicating the reconciliation of balances should be prepared in the Cash Book.

Scrutiny of records for the period 2015-16 revealed that in three ZPs14

reconciliation statements were not prepared and there was a total difference of

` 87.17 lakh between Cash Books’ balance and banks’ balance of Th FC,

Fourth SFC and BRGF as on 31 March 2016. Failure to reconcile the difference

was fraught with risk of misuse of funds.

1.9.6 Maintenance of Accounts by PRIs

1.9.6.1 Maintenance of Accounts by PRIs

The Panchayats were required to maintain accounts as per Section 30, 58 and 85

of the BPRA, 2006. No separate rules were framed under the existing BPRA

and at the best, the provisions of the BPRA 1947 and Panchayat Samiti and Zila

Parishads (Budget and Accounts) Rules, 1964 were being followed. The revised

Budget and Accounts Rules for PRIs were to be framed by September 2013 but,

the Budget and Accounts Rules for PRIs were not framed (January 2017). In six

test checked ZPs15

, accounts were found maintained in single entry system. The

PRIs were maintaining accounts on cash basis in single entry system.

1.9.6.2 Model Accounting System and PRIASoft

Model Accounting System (MAS) was prescribed (2009) by GoI in consultation

with the CAG of India for exercising proper control and securing better

accountability. Consequently, the PRD, GoB notified (July 2010) that the

accounts of PRIs would be maintained in the MAS formats16

from 1 April 2010.

In Bihar, the MAS was implemented through Panchayati Raj Institutions

Accounting Software (PRIASoft) developed by the National Informatics Centre

(NIC). It aims at computerization of accounts of all the three levels of PRIs

through MAS. It was observed that accounting work was done in PRIASoft till

2014-15 and out of total eight MAS formats, only three formats17

were being

13

Aurangabad, Buxar, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Patna, Rohtas and West Champaran 14

Buxar (` 5.04 lakh), Gopalganj (` 40.67 lakh) and Muzaffarpur (` 41.46 lakh) 15

Aurangabad, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Patna, Rohtas, and West Champaran 16

Format-I: Annual Receipt and Payments Accounts; Format-II: Consolidated Abstract

Register; Format-III: Monthly Reconciliation Statement; Format-IV: Statement of

Receivables and Payables; Format-V: Register of Immovable Property; Format-VI:

Register of movable property; Format-VII: Inventory Register; and Format - VIII:

Register of Demand and Collection 17

Format-I, II and III


17

generated. However, accounting work in PRIASoft was discontinued since

17 April 2015 and e-Panchayat module was introduced thereafter.

Thus, after a lapse of six years from adoption of MAS formats, maintenance of

accounts in MAS formats remained unimplemented.

1.9.7 Impact of Audit

Recoveries amounting to ` 8.12 lakh were made from the person(s) concerned

in four PRIs18

at the instance of audit conducted during 2015-16.

1.9.8 Good Practices

JEEVIKA is an initiative of the State Government for poverty alleviation. The

Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (BRLPS) is functioning under the

overall framework of National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) and

implementing the JEEVIKA scheme. By the end of September 2015, 47 lakh

poor households were mobilised into 4.40 lakh Self-Help Groups (SHGs). Out

of these SHGs, 60 per cent were federated into 21,529 Village Organisations.

18

GP-Kachiana ` 4.14 lakh, PS- Khijarsarai - ` 1.57 lakh, Kumarkhand- ` 0.50 lakh and

ZP West Champaran- ` 1.91 lakh

Chapter-II

Compliance Audits

Panchayati Raj Department

2.1 Implementation of recommendations of Fourth State Finance

Commission in PRIs

2.1.1 Introduction

In pursuance of Article 243-I of the Constitution of India and Section 168 of the

Bihar Panchayat Raj Act (BPRA), 2006, Government of Bihar (GoB) constituted

the Fourth State Finance Commission (Fourth SFC) in June 2007 to review the

financial position of Panchayats. The Fourth SFC made recommendations on

principles that should govern the distribution between the State and the

Panchayats, of the net proceeds of the taxes, duties, tolls and fees leviable by the

State. The Fourth SFC submitted (June 2010) 17 recommendations to strengthen

the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to enable them to function as local self-

government.

The audit covering the period 2011-16 was conducted during June to September

2016 through a test-check of records in four Zila Parishads (ZPs), 16 Panchayat

Samitis (PSs) and 49 Gram Panchayats (GPs) under the PSs.

The audit commenced with an Entry Conference on 9 May 2016 with the

Secretary, PRD, GoB. Exit Conference was held on 3 February 2017 with the

Secretary of the department wherein audit findings were discussed and the replies

of the department have been suitably incorporated in the Report.

Audit findings

The State Government accepted all the 17 recommendations made by Fourth SFC

in respect of the PRIs (Appendix -2.1). However, four recommendations were

implemented in toto, ten recommendations were implemented with modifications,

whereas no action was taken on three recommendations.

2.1.2 Recommendations implemented in toto

The Fourth SFC made four recommendations with regard to allocation of funds to

the PRIs and the Urban Local Bodies and its subsequent release to the three tier

PRIs as detailed under:-

Out of the total devolution as share in State taxes to Local Bodies 70 per cent

should be for PRIs and 30 per cent for the ULBs.

Among the PRIs the total devolved share in State taxes should be further shared

in the proportion of 70 per cent to GPs, 20 per cent to PSs and 10 per cent to ZPs.

The 10 per cent share of the ZPs should be distributed among the ZPs on the

single criterion of population of the district.

The 70 per cent share of the GPs should be distributed equally among all GPs.

Audit observed that the above recommendations were accepted by the State

Government in toto.


20

2.1.3 Recommendations implemented with modifications

2.1.3.1 Release of funds to Local Bodies by the State Government

The Fourth SFC recommended that 7.5 per cent of the State’s tax revenue net of

collection costs should be devolved to the local bodies on the basis of the audited

figures of that financial year.

Audit observed that as per the Fourth SFC recommendation the State Government

had to release ` 4026.55 crore during 2010-15 to the PRIs. The details of grants

released and shortfall are given in Table:-2.1 and Chart:-2.1 below:

Table-2.1: Status of State own Tax Revenue and amount released to the PRIs (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Sl.

No. Particular 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total

1. Total State Revenue from

own sources 9869.85 12612.10 16253.08 19961 20750 79446.03

2. Less: Cost of Collection 439.33 495.03 542.24 624.88 648.49 2749.97

3. Net Revenue 9430.52 12117.07 15710.84 19336.12 20101.51 76696.06

4. Amount to be released to

PRIs as per recommendation 495.10 636.15 824.82 1015.15 1055.33 4026.55

5. Actual Release to the PRIs 0 400.31 493.43 636.07 50.6819 1580.49

6. Short Release of grant (4-5) 495.10 235.84 331.39 379.08 1004.65 2446.06

Chart-2.1

(Source: Information furnished by the Finance department and PRD, GoB)

Above Table-2.1 and Chart-2.1 show that against the recommendations of

` 4026.55 crore grants, only ` 1580.49 crore20

(39 per cent) was released to the

PRIs as the State Government decided to release 7.5 per cent share of SOTR to

local bodies since 2011-12. It was also observed that during 2010-11, no funds

were released by the State Government, though ` 495.1 crore was to be released

as per the recommendation of Fourth SFC.

The Deputy Secretary, Finance department stated (October 2016) that it was the

considered decision of the State Government to release the grant on net tax

collected two years back. The Secretary clarified that it was practically not

19

The Finance department, GoB did not release the allotted share of the PRIs as the PRD

failed to submit the proposal. 20

` 953.97 crore for high priority sectors and ` 626.52 crore for other development works

and salary

Chapter - II: Compliance Audit

21

possible to release the funds on the basis of current year SOTR. The reply was not

acceptable in the light of Fourth SFC recommendations as the PRIs received

` 2446.06 crore less for execution of high priority works and for spending on

purposes consistent with the duties and functions envisaged in the Act.

2.1.3.2 Release of share of Local Bodies in two half yearly instalments

As per Fourth SFC recommendation, grants to PRIs were to be released in two

instalments. First instalment was to be released by not later than 30 September

and the balance before the end of the financial year.

Audit observed that, in two years (2011-13) out of the three years of Fourth SFC

period (2010-15), grants were released in one instalment at the fag end of the

year. As a result, no works were taken up by the sampled PRIs during 2011-12

and execution of works got delayed as grants of a particular year were utilised

during next year and consequently, ` 5.09 crore remained unspent with test

checked PRIs even after lapse of Fourth SFC period.

2.1.3.3 Release of funds to Panchayat Samitis

As per Fourth SFC recommended that the 20 per cent share of Panchayat Samitis

should be distributed among the PSs on the criterion of 80 per cent weight to

population and 20 per cent weight to number of BPL families.

Audit observed that in Nalanda and Saran districts, funds were not transferred to

the PSs as per the criteria of 80 per cent weight to population and 20 per cent

weight to number of BPL families. Instead, the funds were transferred as per the

population of the PSs. As a result, ` 20.94 lakh meant for 22 PS21

were

transferred to the other 18 PS22

that did not meet the criteria.

The CEO, ZP Nalanda and the CEO, ZP Saran accepted the audit contention.

2.1.3.4 Release of funds under high priority sectors

Six23

activities were identified as high priority for PRIs. These activities can

primarily be financed through devolution amount of share in State taxes. The

estimated cost of these programmes is ` 1,590 crore. The Fourth SFC

recommended allocation of fund of ` 316.72 crore each year under the five24

high

priority sectors to 8,463 GPs and ` 1.27 crore to 531 PSs for sanitation25

.

Audit observed, that against recommendation of ` 1,589.95 crore for GPs

(` 1,583.6 crore) and PSs (` 6.35 crore) for the period 2010-15, only ` 667.78

crore was released to GPs equally. This happened as the State Government

released ` 953.97 crore against recommended amount of ` 1,589.95 crore and

due to allocation of GP’s share to ZP and PS of in the ratio of 10 per cent

(` 95.39 crore) and 20 per cent (` 186.98 crore) respectively. Thus, there was not

only a short release of ` 635.98 crore under the high priority sectors but funds

21

Nalanda-11 PS and Saran-11 PS 22

Nalanda-9 PS and Saran-9 PS 23

Drinking water, Brick Soling, Drain, Sanitation, Library and Street lighting 24

Two activities Brick Soling and Construction of drain clubbed as one activity 25

For cleaning of drains, ponds public roads, wells and similar functions


22

amounting to ` 282.38 crore26

meant for the exclusive use of the GPs were also

distributed to the ZPs and the PSs. As a result, GPs failed to execute works as per

its discretion regarding selection of villages where development works were

required as the ZPs and the PSs executed works as per their own plans.

The Monitoring Officer, PRD replied that in comparison to GPs, the PSs and ZPs

were being allocated less amount and there was demand for excess amount from

time to time. Further, the department is considerate to the three tier PRIs and as

such takes decisions to provide funds. The reply is not tenable as the

recommendation of Fourth SFC was not followed.

Execution of schemes under high priority sector

The GoB released funds of ` 23.01 crore to the sampled units under five priority

sectors which were to be utilised in prescribed ratio 27

of grant as per Government

directions. The head wise utilisation of the funds under the five priority sectors

during the period 2011-16 is given in Appendix-2.2 and its abstract is given in

Table 2.2 below:

Table-2.2: Execution of schemes under the high priority sector (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Sector of work Prescribed

Percentage

Grant

availa

ble

Expendit

ure

Amount

Per cent

utilised against

grant available

No. of Units

with no

utilisation

Drinking Water 15.75 3.62 9.44 41.02 4

Street lighting 16.25 3.74 1.62 7.04 45

Brick soling and Drains 61.20 14.08 13.62 59.19 14

Library 3.2 0.73 0.02 0.09 56

Sanitation 3.6 0.83 0 0 69

Total 100 23 24.7*

(Source: Information furnished by PRIs)

* Expenditure includes high priority grant, interest and other development grant.

It was evident from the Table- 2.2 above that:

The prescribed ratio of grants was not adhered in any of the sector of works. In

drinking water head 41.02 per cent and in street lighting 7.04 per cent was

utilised instead of the prescribed limit of 15.75 per cent and 16.25 per cent

respectively.

Audit also observed that 45 to 69 test checked units failed to incur any

expenditure on any of the three priority sectors viz. street lighting, library and

sanitation.

During physical verification of the schemes, Audit noticed that 37 works for hand

pump involving ` 8.47 lakh were found executed in private premises in two PSs

and 11 GPs (Appendix-2.3) in contrary to Government’s instruction.

Physical verification of the schemes also revealed that 39 works28

of hand pump

and solar lights amounting to ` 10.46 lakh were found out of order in three PSs

26

` 953.97 crore*30 per cent – ` 3.81 crore 27

Drinking water-16 per cent, Brick Soling and drains-61 per cent, Sanitation-4 per cent,

Library-3 per cent and Street lighting-16 per cent 28

15 hand pumps amounting to ` 3.40 lakh and 24 solar lights amounting to ` 7.06 lakh


23

and 18 GPs (Appendix-2.4). The above facts were confirmed during beneficiary

survey.

2.1.3.5 Grants for Capacity building

The Fourth SFC recommended that grants at ` 15 lakhs, ` one lakh and ` two

lakhs per annum were to be given to each ZP, PS and GP respectively for

capacity building (` 901.35 crore over the five year period of 2010-15 at ` 180.27

crore per annum).

Audit observed that the State Government released ` 538.11 crore to the PRIs for

three years (2011-14) only for Account maintenance and Capacity Building29

to

fulfil the basic responsibility of planning, budgeting, spending, accounting and

reporting against the recommendation of ` 901.35 crore for 2010-15.

The PRD replied that due to ban on release of grants by the Finance department,

the amount could not be allocated to PRIs while Finance department replied that

the PRD failed to submit proposal for releasing of grants. Thus, PRIs were

deprived of the grants due to lackadaisical approach of the departments.

Test checked PRIs received ` 5.22 crore as untied grants out of which only 20 per

cent was expended on admissible works. Thirteen PSs and 22 GPs failed to

expend any amount under the untied head while in the remaining units, the

expenditure percentage ranged from one to sixty seven per cent.

Further, contrary to the Fourth SFC

recommendations and Government

directives Audit noticed that test

checked PRIs expended untied grants

of ` 2.60 crore (50 per cent) on

execution of schemes and office

contingencies instead of spending the

amount on account maintenance and

capacity building while grants

amounting to ` 1.56 crore (30 per

cent) remained unspent in 60 test

checked units as depicted in Chart-2.2

and details have been given in Appendix -2.5.

The PRIs replied that expenditure was incurred on office contingencies due to

paucity of fund in contingency head. There was no clear direction for expenditure

from GoB and works were executed as per the requirement of the PSs and GPs.

The reply was not tenable as the grant sanctioning letter had clearly indicated the

purposes for which the fund was to be utilised.

During physical verification, Audit noticed that in six30

GPs ` 10.80 lakh was

incurred on purchases of computer and its related parts and chairs and tables but

these items were being used for private purposes by Mukhiya/Ex-Mukhiya of the

GPs.

29

Purchase and maintenance of Computer, printer, Scanner, Fax Machine, Telephone,

Internet connection, Computer Table and related equipment’s and payment to the service

of outsourced employees for the audit work 30

GPs-Attanagar, Agauthar Sundar, Bhaisaha, Bhaluari. MeghiNagma and Nipaniya


24

Purchase of computer set in custody and private use

of the Ex-Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Atanagar under

Panchayat Samiti Isuapur in Saran District (Date of

Photography 5 August 2016)

Purchase of computer set in custody and private use

of the Ex-Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Agauthar

Sunder under Panchayat Samiti Isuapur in Saran

District (Date of Photography 5 August 2016)

2.1.3.6 Utilisation of untied grants by ZPs

The Fourth SFC recommended that the untied amounts left after fulfilment of the

requirement for priority sectors were to be spent on purposes consistent with the

duties and functions stated in the Act and was not to be utilised for payment of

salary or purchase of vehicles without previous sanction of the State Government.

Audit scrutiny revealed that for PSs and GPs, the State Government released

grants of ` 518.27 crore during 2011-14 in the ratio of 20:70 of the remaining

portion of share of PRI in SOTR in the form of other development grant and ZP

share of ` 108.25 crore was released for payment of salaries and retirement

benefits during 2011-15 as per the population of the district instead of on other

development heads. As a result, the ZPs failed to receive additional funds to be

spent on purposes consistent with the duties and functions stated in the Act.

2.1.3.7 Devolution of Functions, Funds and Functionaries (3F)

The Fourth SFC recommended that transfer of 3F should be expedited. It has to

be done in such a manner that regular government employees are not put to any

hardship and work of other departments, if done by such employees also does not

suffer. The panchayats should also be in a position to exercise effective control

over the functionaries transferred.

Audit observed that the departments of GoB had transferred (July to September

2001) 79 functions to GPs, 60 functions to PSs and 61 functions to ZPs and

prepared activity mapping31

. But the process so far on department wise and

subject wise activity mapping was unsatisfactory. Parastatal Bodies32

were also

carrying out the functions devolved to PRIs. Though funds available to the PRIs

from various sources were grossly inadequate for their assigned functions, they

were not able to utilise even that due to capacity constraints. Staff was answerable

to their respective departments and the PRIs did not have adequate staff to

discharge the devolved functions.

In the test checked four ZPs, 81 per cent posts were vacant whereas in GPs under

test checked 16 PSs, 57 per cent post of Panchayat Secretary was vacant as of

31

Activity mapping defines tier wise performance of devolved functions by PRIs. 32

Bodies owned and controlled wholly or partly by the Government.


25

March 2016. Block staff was in additional charge of PSs as no separate cadre was

created for PS.

Thus, it was clear that devolution of 3F was not effective. The Secretary, PRD

stated that shortage of manpower was the main obstacle in achieving the goals of

devolution and steps were being taken to fill the vacant posts by June 2017.

2.1.3.8 Payment of salaries to the employees of the PRIs

The Fourth SFC recommended that expenditure on current salary of employees

working against sanctioned posts was to be borne by the Government for another

five years without any tapering.

GoB released grants of ` 108.25 crore for payment of salary to ZPs in the State

for four years (2011-15) only on the single criterion of the population of the

district against actual requirement as per men-in-position of the ZPs.

In the four test checked ZPs, ` 15.34 crore was released against the total salary

demand of ` 29.78 crore for the period 2011-15. As a result, GoB grants could

meet only 39 to 70 per cent of the salary demand of employees in the four test

checked ZPs and the remaining ` 14.44 crore of salary demand was met by the

ZPs out of its own sources as detailed in the Table 2.3 and Chart-2.3 below:

Table-2.3: Statement showing payment of Salary and Retirement benefits

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

District Salary and

Retirement

Benefits paid

Grants made

available under

Fourth SFC

Deficit in

Grants

Percentage

of Grant

available

Percentage

of Deficit

Madhubani 7.22 5.03 2.19 69.63 30.37

Nalanda 4.69 2.93 1.76 62.44 37.56

Rohtas 6.73 3.07 3.66 45.62 54.38

Saran 11.14 4.31 6.83 38.68 61.32

Total 29.78 15.34 14.44

(Source: Information furnished by the Zila Parishad and Grant sanctioning letter PRD, GoB)

Chart-2.3

(Source- Information furnished by the Zila Parishad)

This hampered ZPs to utilise their own sources in creation of new assets and

become financially self-reliant as discussed in para 2.1.4.2 of the report.


26

The Monitoring Officer, PRD replied that as per Finance department resolution,

10 per cent share was to be released to the ZPs as per population of the districts.

Further, ZP was to make arrangement of salary of staff out of its own sources and

that salary was not provided to ZP as compulsion but assistance.

The reply was not tenable as Fourth SFC had recommended payment of salary to

ZP staff for five years without any tapering.

2.1.3.9 Payment of Retirement Benefits

The Fourth SFC recommended that the arrears of retirement benefit to employees

of local bodies should be cleared by giving a one-time lump sum grants-in-aid.

Audit observed, that no such grant was released to the PRIs by the State

Government during 2010-15. Instead the State Government directed the PRIs to

pay retirement benefits out of the salary grants released. As a result, retirement

benefit could not be paid and there was considerable amount of arrears on this

account. Against an allotment of ` 7.96 crore (2011-15) for salary and retirement

benefits to ZP Madhubani and Nalanda, ` 92 lakh remained unspent till the end of

March 2016. However, a sum of ` 94 lakh was outstanding as retirement dues of

20 retired employees (January 2011 to June 2015) in the two ZPs.

The Additional Chief Executive Officer (ACEO), ZP Nalanda stated that action

was being taken for payment of the retirement benefits.

2.1.3.10 Adoption of accounting formats for PRIs

The Fourth SFC recommended that the accounting formats prescribed by C&AG

should be adopted and accounting manuals be finalised in consultation with

Accountant General. It was also recommended that the possibility of simplifying

the formats may also be explored.

PRD, GoB notified (September 2010) that PRIs should maintain their accounts in

Model Accounting System (MAS) in eight formats from April 2010 as prescribed

by the C&AG of India through effective roll out of Panchayati Raj Institutions

Accounting Software.

However, it was observed from the records maintained by the PRD that out of

eight data formats, only three were generated upto to March 2015 and five

formats were not maintained as accrual basis of accounting required was not

adopted by PRIs and thereafter, no formats in MAS were maintained. As a result,

financial statements of the accounts of PRIs were not prepared and actual status

of assets of PRIs was not ascertainable.

Further, even after 10 years of enactment of the BPRA, 2006, new Accounting

Rules were not framed by the GoB and the provisions of BPRA, 1947 and PS and

ZP (Budget and Accounts) Rule, 1964 were being followed. It was noticed that,

the test checked PRIs did not maintain even the aforesaid three data formats.

Audit scrutiny of the test checked units also revealed the following irregularities

in maintenance of accounts:

Grant of ` 17.83 crore for transfer to PSs and GPs was not entered in the Cash

Book by the ZP Madhubani. It was observed that a lump sum entry of the grant

was made in an abstract prepared for the month of July 2013 to February 2014.

Thus, Cash Book did not depict the actual status of receipts and expenditure


27

during the period. The CEO, ZP Madhubani accepted the findings and assured

that this would not be done in future.

In ZP Saran, a total sum of ` 7.94 lakh was expended from untied grant Cash

Book during 13 December 2013 to 25 January 2014 but the said amount was

debited from the bank account (Punjab National Bank A/c no.-434517)

maintained for high priority sectors grant instead of bank account (A/c no.-

455404) specially maintained for untied grant. As a result, three works of high

priority sectors could not be completed due to requirement of additional funds. In

reply, the CEO, ZP Saran accepted the findings and assured that the amount

would be transferred to high priority sector bank account.

There was a difference between balance in bank pass book and Cash Book

balance by ` 38.59 lakh in 9 PSs and 15 GPs during 2011-16 which was not

reconciled as on 31 March 2016 (Appendix-2.6). The unreconciled differences

were fraught with risk of misuse of funds. Executive Officer of PSs and the

Panchayat Secretaries of the GPs concerned replied that difference between Cash

Book and bank balance would be reconciled.

2.1.4 Recommendations not implemented by the Government

2.1.4.1 Grants-in-aid to PSs and ZPs

The share in State taxes followed by the grants-in-aid to PSs and ZPs shall be

firstly put to use in filling the gaps in the actual cost of execution of schemes

identified as priority activities. The Fourth SFC guidelines and State Government

directives specified the purposes33

for which funds under Fourth SFC were to be

utilised.

Audit observed, that grants were not released to ZP and PS for the purposes

specified in the guidelines of Fourth SFC/ directives of the Government.

However, out of GPs share under high priority sectors amount was released to

ZPs and PSs.

During test- check it was observed that ZP Madhubani and ZP Rohtas

incurred expenditure of ` 1.39 crore on 36 inadmissible works during 2012-16

(Appendix- 2.7) out of GP share.

Regarding execution of inadmissible item of works the CEO, ZP Madhubani

replied that works were executed as per recommendation of the elected members

of the ZP. The reply was not tenable as Government’s directives were violated.

2.1.4.2 Financial Self-reliance of PRIs

The Fourth SFC recommended that the PRIs, especially the ZPs, should strive to

become financially self-reliant by raising their own resources by approaching

financial institutions for investment in projects to ensure that the prime lands

available to them are put to profitable use and may also try to explore the

possibility of creating assets by adopting the Public Private Partnership mode.

33

Brick Soling and Drain, Drinking water, Library, Sanitation and Street lighting


28

Profitable use of prime lands/creating assets

Audit Scrutiny revealed that the four test checked ZPs failed to approach the

financial institutions or adopt Public Private Partnership mode for profitable use

of their prime lands. ZP Rohtas and Nalanda planned for construction of shops

but failed in its implementation.

It was further noticed that:

ZP Rohtas made provision of ` 6.27 crore in 2011-12 for construction of shops at

20 places in ZP budget which was raised to ` 7.10 crore in 2013-14 and

construction of shops at first floor with estimated cost of ` 90 lakh in six places

where shops had already been constructed (2011-12), but no expenditure was

incurred.

The CEO, ZP Rohtas stated that due to shortage of staff and absence of regular

District Engineer, the construction work could not be taken up. The reply

regarding shortage of staff is not tenable as the construction could have been

undertaken through tender.

ZP Rohtas advertised (October 2000) for construction of 99 shops under self-

financing mode in eight blocks at an estimated cost of ` 48.75 lakh at Chenari

Inspection Bungalow. ZP issued notice to lease the proposed shops for ten years

in October 2000 and received ` 57.17 lakh (July 2006) including interest from 76

lesses for construction. A sum of ` 37.89 lakh had been spent on the construction

of the shops out of the amount received but the shops remained incomplete

(August 2016). As a result, the ZP was deprived of revenue in the form of rent

amounting to ` 13 lakh34

during the period 2011-16.

The CEO, ZP Rohtas replied that due to lack of monitoring on the part of the then

CEO, ZP construction of the shops could not be completed. Audit observed that

the present CEO, ZP also failed to take effective steps to complete the

construction of the shops during his tenure since October 2014.

ZP Nalanda in its general meeting (23 July 2011) resolved to construct a market

complex consisting of 122 shops in seven blocks in the premises of Parwalpur

Inspection Bungalow. Advertisement for the allotment of the said shops was

published (June 2012) and the ZP received 22 applications along with a security

deposit of ` 5,000 each (July 2012) but, shops were not constructed. As

construction of the shops were not initiated, there was an annual loss of revenue

of ` 8.78 lakh35

to the ZP.

The ACEO, ZP Nalanda replied that as the requisite number of application for

allotment of shops were not received, construction work could not be undertaken.

The reply was not tenable as no steps were taken by the ZP authorities to re-

advertise for the construction of shops.

Enhancement of revenue

The PRD issued (July 2013) instructions to the District Magistrate, Deputy

Development Commissioner in the State to initiate action for enhancing the

revenue of the ZP by way of survey of assets, construction in vacant lands of the

ZP for official and commercial purposes, renovation of the ZP buildings and

34

62 shops @ ` 240, 36 shops @ ` 180 and 1 shop @ ` 432 35

Annual loss of revenue= ` 600 x 122 x 12 months i.e., ` 8.78 lakh


29

putting it on rent or utilising for its work, recovering of rents of Dak

Bungalow/Inspection Bungalow at market rate.

In contravention to the above directives, the following deficiencies were noticed

in the four test checked ZPs.

Occupation of ZP Inspection Bungalow/lands

In two ZPs, seven Inspection Bungalows/buildings (Appendix-2.8) were occupied

by the officers of the State Government for running block offices/residence and

by the private parties for running of Sudha Milk Parlour and operation of Bus

Stand without paying any rent or nominal rent. Some cases are illustrated below:

The Inspection Bungalows Madhubani having an area of 1 acre 15 decimal was

being used by District Magistrate, Madhubani as his official residence by paying

a nominal rent of ` 250 per month.

The Dak Bunglow at Benipatti was occupied by the Deputy Superintendent of

Police Benipatti as his residence but no rent was being paid by him.

Four rooms at Inspection Bungalows at Bikramganj were occupied by the Sub

Divisional Officer @ ` 68 per day the rate of rent remained same since 2005-06

while IB Kochas was being used as Block and Circle office @ ` 64 per day and

rent has not been revised for the last 24 years.

The CEO, ZP Madhubani and the CEO, Rohtas replied that necessary action for

realisation of the rent at the prevailing market rate would be initiated with

intimation to the PRD. The reply is not tenable as the ZPs not only failed to

enhance the rate of rent despite the Government direction but also did not apprise

the Government in this regard.

Realisation of rent

Vikas Bhawan, office of the District Rural Development Agencies (DRDA)

Madhubani having an area of 14,765 sq. ft. constructed on the land of ZP

Madhubani was not paying any rent to the ZP since construction. As a result, the

ZP was deprived of rent of ` 55.37 lakh36

at the prevailing market rate during

2011-16. The CEO, ZP Madhubani replied that rent would be demanded from the

DRDA.

Outstanding rent

In three ZPs, rent of 1,325 shops amounting to ` 90 lakh was lying outstanding

against the lessee for a period ranging from one to two hundred forty two months.

The ZPs also failed to take effective steps to enhance the rent of the shops which

were being realised at rates fixed between December 1987 and September 2011

due to the failure to revise/renew the agreement (Appendix-2.9).

The CEO, ZP Madhubani, and the ACEO, ZP Nalanda replied that notice was

being served to the shopkeepers for realisation of the outstanding rent while the

revision /renewal of the agreement was in process. The CEO, ZP Saran replied

36

` 90,805 per month @ ` 6.15 per sq. ft from April 2011 and ` 1,03,355 per month @

` 7 per sq. ft from January 2015 to March 2016


30

that agreement of shops was not done at the time of allotment of shops however,

ZP later executed agreements with some lessee but no revision/renewal of

agreement was done.

Two ZPs let out their premises to the State Government offices but the rent was

not being paid by the offices for the last one to 22 years approx. thereby depriving

the ZPs of revenue to the tune of ` 24.86 lakh (Appendix- 2.10).

The CEO, ZP Rohtas replied that despite several reminders the rent was not paid

by the concerning offices. The ACEO, ZP Nalanda replied that notice has been

issued in the past for realisation of the rent and fresh notices is also being issued.

The reply was not tenable as the ZPs failed to intimate the matter to the State

Government.

Thus, the ZPs not only failed to realise rent in time but also failed to take steps for

increasing rate of rent.

2.1.4.3 Imposition of Tax

As per Fourth SFC recommendation, the State Government had to notify the

maximum rate of taxes to be levied by the PRIs to enable them to raise resources

or amend the law so that there would be no need to have government approval.

The State Government failed to notify any rate of taxes as of May 2016, as a

result, the PRIs were unable to generate revenue by way of taxation.

The Secretary, PRD informed (February 2017) that the process for notification of

rate of taxes is in advance stage and would be notified soon.

2.1.5 Conclusion

The recommendation of the Fourth SFC to notify the maximum rates of taxes to

be levied by the PRIs to enable them to raise resources was not implemented by

the Government. As a result, the PRIs were still dependent on the Government

grants to execute various schemes.

The recommendation to strive for financial self- sufficiency through profitable

use of prime land and creation of assets by adopting PPP mode was not yet

implemented by the PRIs.

State Government did not devolve grants to PRIs as per accepted

recommendations of Fourth SFC. There was a short release of grant of ` 2,446.06

crore during 2010-15. The grants for the year 2010-11 was not released whereas,

against entitled grant of ` 1,055.33 crore for the year 2014-15, only ` 50.68 crore

was released.

Funds under High Priority Sectors meant for exclusive use of GPs and PSs were

allocated to the ZPs also. Though the State Government accepted the recommendation of Fourth SFC to

release grants to PRIs for salary and retirement benefit for the period 2010-15

only 39 to 70 per cent of grant was made available to ZPs for the purpose.


31

2.1.6 Recommendations

Based on above audit findings, we recommend that:-

The State Government should notify the maximum rate of taxes to be levied by

PRIs.

The PRIs should strive for financial self-reliance through profitable use of their

prime land and should create new assets through PPP mode.

The State Government should devolve adequate funds and functionaries to PRIs

to enable them to carry out the mandated functions.

In order to increase its share of revenue, the ZPs should take appropriate steps for

timely enhancement of rents of their buildings/shops and its collection in time.

2.2 Loss of rental income

Rule 37 of Bihar Financial Rules (BFR) stipulates that the departmental

controlling officer should ensure that all sums due to Government are regularly

and promptly assessed and realised. Rule 105 and 106 of the Bihar Panchayat

Samitis and Zila Parishads (Budget and Account) Rules, 1964 stipulate that

separate register shall be maintained to show the details of each source from

which periodical Zila Parishad (ZP) revenue is derived and the register should be

checked annually by the Secretary of ZP and attested.

Scrutiny (February 2016) of records of ZP Patna revealed that a commercial

building named Loknayak Bhawan and an Annexe building were constructed

(March 2000) by the ZP by destroying the old and dilapidated building of

Bankipur Dak Bunglow (1991). The commercial building was completed and let

out (1993) but the Annexe building remained to be leased out as of January 2017.

A meeting was held (March 2000) under the Chairmanship of Commissioner-

cum-Chairman of Loknayak Bhawan Construction Committee to fix the rates for

lease37

of the Annexe Building of Loknayak Bhawan. It was also decided to let

out the building on a monthly rent of ` 25 per sq. ft. of super built-up area for

first floor and at a rate reduced would be lesser by ` one for every two floors

thereafter.

However, after a delay of nine years, a decision was taken in the meetings held in

July 2009 and June 2010 presided by the Chairman and the Chief Executive

Officer (CEO) of ZP respectively to let out the Annexe Building in existing

37

Settlement means Bandobast i.e., awarding of sairats (buildings, ponds, bus stand etc.) to

a person or firm through advertisement for a fixed period at an agreed value.

Inaction by the CEO, ZP Patna to follow the orders of the ZP Board to

lease out an eight storied Annexe Building in existing condition resulted

in loss of rental income of `̀̀̀ 3.78 crore during September 2011 to August

2016.


32

condition. The CEO, ZP stated that several government and other organisations38

had expressed their interest in the building in existing condition along with four

other organisations39

(May 2011 to June 2015). Thus, there was opportunity for

ZP to let out the building. However ZP failed to initiate any action till August

2016 despite decision of the ZP Board. This resulted in loss of expected rental

income of ` 3.78 crore for the period September 2011 to August 2016 at the rate

fixed during March 2000. The CEO, ZP neither checked the fixed demand

register nor addressed the issue of leasing of the Annexe building.

Loknayak Annexe Bhawan located at Dak Bunglow Chauraha, Patna

On this being pointed out in audit, the CEO, ZP replied (May 2016) a Committee

was set up to monitor the affairs of lease of Loknayak Annexe Bhawan and after

the constitution of Three Tier Panchayati Raj Institutions in 2001, ZP office

sought (September 2001) clear direction from Rural Development Department

(RDD) regarding validity of the said Committee but no reply was received (May

2016). However, the Secretary Panchayati Raj Department replied (August 2016)

that since entire work of the building was yet to be completed and the building

was not yet handed over by the contractor, the building could not be let out.

Reply of the Secretary was not acceptable as the ZP Board had taken decision to

let out the building in its present condition and the government and other

organizations were interested to take the building on lease.

Reply of the CEO, ZP was also not acceptable as no advertisement was published

in daily newspapers for the lease. Direction regarding the validity of the

Committee could have been taken from the department earlier also so that the

delay could be avoided.

Thus, the lack of initiative by the ZP, Patna and the failure of the monitoring

mechanism in the ZP the Annexe Building could not be let out and the ZP was

deprived of revenue of ` 3.78 crore (Appendix-2.11) up to August 2016.

38 Income Tax Department; National Thermal Power Corporation Limited and others 39

United India Insurance Company Ltd.; O/o the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade;

Coir Board and Registrar, Debts Recovery Tribunal


33

2.3 Avoidable payment of penal interest

As per recommendation of Fourteenth Finance Commission (Fourteenth FC) and

conditions laid down by the Government of India (GoI), the State should release

the grants to the Gram Panchayats (GPs) and Municipalities within 15 days of it

being credited to their account by GoI and in case of delay, the State Government

must release the instalment with interest as per Reserve Bank of India (RBI) rate

from its own funds.

On scrutiny (February-July 2016) of records relating to Panchayati Raj

Department (PRD), it was observed that as per recommendation of Fourteenth

FC, GoI released (30 June 2015) first instalment of ` 1,134.59 crore for the year

2015-16 and the same was received by the State Government (2 July 2015).

However, the State Government had no system for direct transfer of grants to

GPs. As a result, the grant was sanctioned and allotted by GoB to the districts

(17 July 2015) to make available to GPs to spent on identified basic services40

and Deputy Development Commissioner (DDC)-cum-Chief Executive Officer,

Zila Parishad concerned was assigned the work of Drawing and Disbursing

Officer (DDO) for the grant. However, the grant was not made available to 8398

GPs within prescribed 15 days but with delays ranged from 11 days to over

six months.

The PRD, Government of Bihar (GoB) submitted (14 December 2015) Utilisation

Certificates (UCs) of ` 1,134.59 crore to the Ministry of Finance, GoI.

However, the Ministry directed (22 December 2015) the State Government to pay

interest to GPs concerned for the delays in release of grant. Ministry of Finance

further directed the State Government to submit revised UCs after payment of

penal interest to GPs as a prior condition for release of second instalment of grant

for the year 2015-16.

On the issue, the Chief Minister of Bihar remarked (March 2016) that the amount

of grant should have been released to the GPs in time as delayed release caused

extra financial burden on State exchequer and sanctioned (10 March 2016) the

amount of ` 8.12 crore (GP wise) to be paid to GPs, as penal interest.

The PRD replied (July 2016) that the amount of grant was released within

prescribed 15 days by the department but interest was paid due to delay in release

of amount by the DDO at district level due to procedural delay at ZP level.

The reply was not acceptable as the amount of grant was to be credited directly

into the account of GPs concerned and State Government had to ensure release of

grants to GPs within 15 days of receipt of grant. The State Government failed in

establishing a mechanism to transfer amount of grant directly to the accounts of

GPs resulted in delayed release of grants to GPs. Resultantly, GoB had to make

an extra avoidable payment of interest of ` 8.12 crore to GPs. It also caused

40

Parks, roads, street lighting, sanitation, solid waste management and water supply etc.

Delay in release of Fourteenth Finance Commission grants to Gram

Panchayats by Government of Bihar resulted in avoidable payment of

penal interest of `̀̀̀ 8.12 crore.


34

delayed release of second instalment of grant for 2015-16 in March 2016 whereas

it was due in October 2015.

Further, though Chief Minister, Bihar remarked that delayed release of grant

caused extra financial burden on State exchequer, no action has been taken

against the erring DDOs.

Chapter - III

An Overview of the Functioning of the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs)

in Bihar

3.1 Introduction

The Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 had envisaged

creation of local self-governments for urban area population and accordingly

the Municipalities were accorded constitutional status for governance. The

States were required to entrust Municipalities with powers, functions and

responsibilities to enable them to function as institutions of local self-

government and carry out the responsibilities conferred upon them including

18 subjects listed in Twelfth Schedule of the Constitution.

Accordingly, the Government of Bihar (GoB) enacted the Bihar Municipal

Act (BM Act), 2007 by repealing the Bihar and Orissa Municipal Act, 1922

and framed Bihar Municipal Accounts Rules, 2014, the Bihar Municipal

Accounting Manual and the Bihar Municipal Budget Manual. As per Census

2011, the urban population of Bihar was 1.18 crore constituting 11.29 per cent

of the total population (10.41 crore) of the State. As of March 2016, there

were 141 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in the State with 3,320 Councillors. The

last election to the ULBs was held in May 2012.

Sections 7 and 20 of the BM Act, 2007 lay down the criteria for classification

of municipal area by GoB. The number of ULBs on the basis of the

population as ascertained in Census 2011 is given in Table 3.1 below:

Table - 3.1: Classification of ULBs

Category of ULBs Grade Population No. of ULBs

Municipal

Corporation

Larger urban areas More than 2 lakh 11

Municipal Council

Class ‘A’ 1.5 to 2 lakh 42

Class ‘B’ 1 to 1.5 lakh

Class ‘C’ 0.40 to 1 lakh

Nagar Panchayat Transitional small

urban areas

0.12 to 0.40 lakh 88

(Source: Section 7 and 20 of BM Act, 2007)

Municipal area of the State was divided into a number of wards on the basis of

population which were determined and notified by the State Government.

There were minimum 10 wards and maximum 75 wards across different

classes of Municipality in the State. As of March 2016, there were 3,320

wards in the State.

3.2 State Profile

The State of Bihar is among the least urbanised State in the country and only

one city (Patna) of the State had more than one million population. Though

Bihar has 8.6 per cent of India’s total population, but only 3.1 per cent of its


36

Municipal President

Ward Councillors

Minister (UD&HD, GoB)

urban population. The comparative demographic and development statistics of

the State are given in Table 3.2 below:

Table - 3.2: Important statistics of the State

Indicators Unit State All over India

Urban Population Million 11.76 377.11

Urban Population Density Person per Sq. km 4811 3836

Urban Literacy Per cent 76.86 84.11

Number of ULBs Number 141 3700

Number of districts Number 38 686

Urban poverty level Per cent 31.2 13.7

Municipal per capita own revenue ` 58 2540

(Source: Fifth State Finance Commission Report and Report of Indian Institute of Public

Administration, New Delhi)

3.3 Organisational set-up of ULBs

The ULBs are under administrative control of Urban Development and

Housing Department (UD&HD), GoB and headed by the Principal Secretary.

The Municipal Commissioner is the executive head of the Municipal

Corporation while Municipal Council and Nagar Panchayat are headed by the

Executive Officers appointed by the State Government. City Manager is

appointed on contractual basis in ULBs to assist the Executive Officer.

The ULBs have an Empowered Standing Committee (ESC) comprising

Councillors elected by the people and headed by the Mayor (for Municipal

Corporations), the Chairperson (for Municipal Councils) and the Municipal

President (for Nagar Panchayats) elected among members who preside over

the meetings of the ESC. The organisational structure of ULBs is presented in

Chart 3.1 and Chart 3.2 below:

Chart - 3.1: Elected Body

Municipal Corporation Nagar Panchayat Municipal Council

Mayor Municipal Chairperson

Ward Councillors Ward Councillors

Chapter – III: An overview of functioning of Urban Local Bodies in Bihar

37

Chart - 3.2: Administrative Body

(Source: Section 36 of BM Act, 2007 and www.urban.bih.nic.in)

3.4 Functioning of ULBs

3.4.1 Powers of the State Government

The BM Act, 2007 entrusts the State Government with certain powers so as to

enable it to monitor proper functioning of the ULBs. The ULBs have some

powers in delivery of some functions, but decision on all key issues rests

largely with the State Government. A brief summary of powers of the State

Government is given in Table 3.3 below:

Municipal Council Municipal Corporation

Municipal Commissioner-

cum- Chief Executive Officer

Municipal Executive

Officer

• Controller of Municipal

Finance & Accounts

• Municipal Internal Auditor

• Chief Municipal Engineer

• Municipal Architect and

Town Planner

• Chief Municipal Health

Officer

• Municipal Law Officer

• Municipal Secretary

• Additional/Joint Municipal

Commissioners

Municipal Finance Officer

Municipal Engineer

Municipal Health Officer

Municipal Secretary

Principal Secretary (UD&HD, GoB)

Nagar Panchayat

Municipal Executive

Officer

Municipal Finance Officer

Municipal Engineer

Municipal Health Officer

Municipal Secretary


38

Table - 3.3: Powers of the State Government

Authority Powers of the State Government

Section 3

and 6

Constitution of Municipal Area: The State Government may, after

making such enquiry as it may deem fit, and having regard to the

population of any urban area, density of population therein, the

revenue generated for the local administration of such area may by

notification constitute such large urban area, city, town or

transitional area or any specified part thereof as a municipal area

under this Act.

Section 44 State Municipal Vigilance Authority: The State Government shall

appoint Lok Prahari to inquire into any allegation of corruption,

misconduct, lack of integrity or any kind of malpractice or mal-

administration or misdemeanor of Chief/Deputy Chief Councilor/

officers and other employees of the municipality.

Section

65 and 66

Power to inspect office, call for records etc.: The State

Government may inspect any office or call for the records under the

control of the ULBs.

Section 87 Preparation of Manual: The State Government shall prepare and

maintain a Manual viz., the Bihar Municipal Accounting Manual for

implementation of accrual based double entry accounting system

containing details of all financial and accounting matters and

procedures in Municipalities.

Section 419 Power to make Rules: The State Government may, by notification,

make rules to carry out the purpose of BM Act, 2007 subject to

approval by the State Legislature.

Section 421

and 423

Power to make regulations: The Municipality may make

regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of BM

Act, 2007 subject to approval of the State Government.

Section 487 Removal of difficulties: If any difficulty arises in giving effect to

the provisions of BM Act, 2007, the State Government may do

anything necessary to remove such difficulty. (Source: BM Act, 2007)

3.4.2 Devolution of functions and funds

The Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act (74th

CAA) enables the

ULBs to perform functions related to 18 subjects listed in the Twelfth

Schedule of the Constitution. Accordingly, GoB made provisions in BM Act,

2007 for functions relating to 17 subjects (except fire services) to be carried

out by the ULBs (Appendix - 3.1). Audit observed that out of these 17

subjects, functions relating to 12 subjects were carried out traditionally by the

ULBs and functions relating to remaining five41

subjects were performed by

the functional departments of GoB. Separate notification regarding devolution

of functions in terms of 74th

CAA was not issued and activity mapping for

clarification of roles and responsibilities to be carried out by ULBs was also

not done. Due to poor staffing and technical incapabilities of the ULBs, a

number of Parastatal Bodies (PBs) were created for performing various

functions of ULBs and funds were accordingly devolved to them. Thus, the

41

(1) Water supply by Public Health and Engineering Department except in Patna (2)

Urban forestry and protection of environment (3) Fire services (4) promotion of Art &

Culture and (5) Primary education by Education Department.


39

functions of ULBs were overlapped by the functional departments/ PBs of

GoB and even after a lapse of more than 24 years of 74th

CAA, ULBs were

not able to carry out mandated functions.

3.4.3 Devolution of functionaries

Section 36 of BM Act, 2007 provides a number of posts for ULBs but, most

of these posts were vacant. Details of posts vacant as of September 2016 are

given in Table 3.4 (i) & (ii) below:

Table - 3.4 (i): Vacant posts of staff in ULBs

Sl.

No.

ULBs Sanctioned

Post

Men-in-

Position

Vacancy Percentage of

vacant posts

1. Municipal Corporation 5747 2524 3223 56

2. Municipal Council 4923 1977 2946 60

3. Nagar Panchayat 1783 807 976 55

Total 12453 5308 7145 57

(Source: Information provided by UD&HD, GoB)

Table - 3.4 (ii): Vacant posts of Executive and technical staff in ULBs

Sl.

No.

Designation Sanctioned

Post

Men- in

position

Vacancy Percentage

of vacant

posts

1. Executive Officer 130 22 108 83

2. Assistant Engineer 70 3 67 96

3. City Manager 152 69 (on

contract)

83 55

4. Junior Engineer 201 3 198 99 (Source: Information provided by UD&HD, GoB)

It is evident from the Table 3.4 (i) & (ii) above that ULBs were short staffed.

Of the total 12,453 sanctioned posts, 7,145 posts (57 per cent) were vacant.

Audit further observed that 40 per cent posts were vacant as of March 2007

which increased to 57 per cent as of September 2016. Further, 96 to 99 per

cent posts of technical staff were also vacant. The role and responsibilities of

the Executive Officer were being performed by the officers of other

departments as 83 per cent posts of the Executive Officer were vacant as of

September 2016. Functionaries available in the ULBs were grossly inadequate

as there was a freeze on recruitment since 1990. Due to shortage of staff in

ULBs, there was less utilisation of grants, inadequate maintenance of key

records, creation of number of Parallel Bodies for performing various

functions of ULBs etc. However, the UD&HD took step (February 2014, May

2016 and November 2016) for filling up the vacancies of Executive Officers,

Junior Engineers and City Managers.

3.5 Formation of Committees

3.5.1 Empowered Standing Committees

Section 21 and 22 of BM Act, 2007 provide that in every Municipality, there

shall be an Empowered Standing Committee (ESC) and the executive powers


40

of a Municipality shall vest in ESC. The Chief Councilor shall exercise such

powers and functions as are delegated to him by the ESC. The composition of

ESC is shown in Table 3.5 below:

Table - 3.5: Empowered Standing Committees

(Source: Section 21 of the BM Act, 2007)

The ESC is collectively responsible to the Municipal Corporation, the

Municipal Council and the Nagar Panchayat as the case may be.

3.5.2 District Planning Committees

Article 243ZD of the Constitution envisages formation of a District Planning

Committee (DPC) to consolidate the plans prepared by both the Panchayats

and the Municipalities in the district and to prepare a Draft Development Plan

(DDP) for the district as a whole. Accordingly, GoB made provisions in BM

Act, 2007 and framed constitution of Bihar District Planning Committee and

Conduct of Business Rules, 2006.

Section 275 of BM Act, 2007 also provides that all development plan to be

executed by the ULBs should be included in the DDP of the district

consolidated by the DPCs and approved by the State Government. It was,

however noticed that the development works executed up to 2015-16 by the

ULBs from their own sources and civic amenities heads were not included in

the DDPs of the district.

However, the Special Secretary, UD&HD stated (19 December 2016) that

plans prepared by the ULBs for the year 2016-17 were consolidated by the

DPC.

3.6 Audit Arrangements

3.6.1 Primary Auditor

Section 91(1) of BM Act, 2007 provides that the accounts contained in the

financial statement, including the accounts of special funds, if any, and the

balance sheet shall be examined and audited by the Director Local Fund Audit

(DLFA) or his equivalent authority or auditor appointed by the State

Government from the panel of professional Chartered Accountants. Further, as

per section 91(2) of BM Act, 2007 (amended in 2013) the CAG of India shall

provide Technical Guidance and Support (TGS) over proper maintenance of

Category of ULBs Presiding

Officer

Composition of ESC Remarks

Municipal

Corporation

Mayor Mayor, Deputy Mayor and

seven other Councillors

Other

members of

ESC shall be

nominated by

the Chief

Councillor

from amongst

the elected

Councillors.

Class ‘A’ or ‘B’

Municipal

Council

Municipal

Chairperson

Municipal Chairperson,

Municipal Vice-Chairperson

and five other Councillors

Class ‘C’

Municipal

Council

Municipal

Chairperson

Municipal Chairperson,

Municipal Vice-Chairperson

and three other Councillors

Nagar

Panchayat

Municipal

President

Municipal President,

Municipal Vice-President

and three other Councillors


41

accounts and audit of the accounts of ULBs and an Annual Report prepared by

the CAG shall be laid on both the Houses of State Legislature.

The State Government authorised (November 2007) the Examiner of Local

Accounts (ELA) of the office of the Accountant General (Audit), Bihar to

work as DLFA. Accordingly, audit of ULBs was conducted by the ELA as a

primary auditor under provisions contained in Local Fund Audit Act, 1925

upto November 2016.

Further, in pursuance of the Central Finance Commission, the State

Government had notified (June 2015) the establishment of Directorate of

Local Fund Audit headed by the Chief Controller of Accounts-cum-DLFA

under Finance Department of GoB to conduct the audit of Local Bodies and it

had been functioning since 11 June 2015. Audit of ULBs was conducted by

the ELA as DLFA and also by the Directorate of Local Fund Audit during

2015-16 as detailed in Table-3.6 below;

Table 3.6 Status of audit conducted by ELA, AG (Audit) and DLFA, GoB

ULBs Total No.

of units

No. of units

audited by

ELA

No. of units

audited by

DLFA

No. of reports received

from DLFA to AG

(Audit) for guidance

Municipal Corporation 11 11 00 00

Municipal Council 42 20 06 03

Nagar Panchayat 88 28 01 01

Total 141 59 07 04

(Source: information furnished by DLFA and Inspection Reports at ELA office)

Out of total 141 ULBs in the State, the audit of the accounts of 59 ULBs42

was

conducted by ELA whereas, audit of seven units43

of ULBs was conducted by

the Directorate of Local Fund Audit during 2015-16. Out of total units of

ULBs conducted by DLFA, reports of four ULBs were submitted (September

2015) to the office of ELA for guidance and comments on these reports were

communicated to DLFA (December 2015).

3.6.2 Audit by Comptroller and Auditor General of India

The Central Finance Commission had recommended that the CAG must be

entrusted with TGS over the audit of all the Local Bodies at every tier/

category and his Annual Technical Inspection Report as well as Annual

Report of DLFA must be placed before both the Houses of State Legislature.

In this regard, the State Government had created (October 2013) a cell44

under

the Finance Department for audit of Local Bodies. Further, the State

42

Municipal Corporation (11): Ara, Bhagalpur, Begusarai, Biharsharif, Darbhanga, Gaya,

Katihar, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Patna and Purnea; Municipal Council (20): Araria, Bettiah,

Bhabhua, Bihat, Dehri Dalmianagar, Gopalganj, Hilsa, Jamui, Khagaul, Madhepura,

Madhubani, Motihari, Samastipur, Sasaram, Sheikhpura, Sitamarhi, Siwan, Sultanganj and

Supaul; Nagar Panchayat (28): Areraj, Bakhtiyarpur, Barauli, Barhaiya, Bihiya, Bodhgaya,

Chanpatiya, Daudnagar, Dhaka, Fatuha, Jhanjharpur, Jogbani, Kahalgawn, Kesaria, Khusrupur,

Koath, Mahnar, Mirganj, Murliganj, Nasriganj, Nirmali, Piro, Rafiganj, Rajgir, Sherghati, Silao,

Sonpur and Teghra. 43

Municipal Council- Bhabhua, Danapur, Lakhisarai, Phulwarisarif, Sasaram and Sitamarhi;

Nagar Panchayat- Sheohar 44

Comprising 39 senior auditors and one Deputy Finance Controller


42

Government notified (June 2015) the establishment of Directorate of Local

Fund Audit for the purpose. The Finance Department, GoB intimated

(December 2015) that the State Government had accepted the Standard Terms

and Conditions under Regulations on Audit and Accounts, 2007 for audit of

Local Bodies under TGS arrangement. Audit under TGS arrangement

commenced from December 2016.

3.7 Response to audit observations

3.7.1 Poor response to Inspection Reports

After completion of audit, Inspection Reports (IRs) containing audit findings

were sent to the audited entities with a copy to the UD&HD, GoB. The Chief

Executive Officer/Executive Officers of the audited entities concerned were

required to respond to observations contained in the IRs and submit

compliance report to the ELA within three months from the date of receipt of

the IRs. The Executive Officers did not take effective steps to comply with the

observations contained in the IRs which was evident from increasing number

of outstanding audit paragraphs year by year. Details of paragraphs

outstanding are given in Table 3.7 and Chart - 3.3 below:

Table - 3.7: Outstanding audit paragraphs for the last five years (2011-16)

Year No.

of

IRs

No. of

paras

in IRs

Amount

involved

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

No. of

paras

settled

Amount of

settlement

(`̀̀̀ in

crore)

No. of paras

outstanding

Money value

of paras

outstanding

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (3-5) 8 (4-6)

2011-12 43 1237 52.94 360 4.16 877 48.78

2012-13 61 1398 45.63 213 1.74 1185 43.89

2013-14 67 1141 75.35 161 4.68 980 70.67

2014-15 93 1898 373.66 543 9.04 1355 364.62

2015-16 35 497 70.91 - - 497 70.91

Total 299 6171 618.49 1277 19.62 4894 598.87

(Source: Inspection Reports on the accounts of ULBs)

Chart - 3.3


43

It is evident from the Table 3.7 and Chart - 3.3 above that out of total 6,171

paragraphs contained in 299 IRs, only 1,277 paragraphs (21 per cent) were

settled and 4,894 paragraphs involving ` 598.87 crore were remained

outstanding as of 31 March 2016.

Huge outstanding paragraphs indicated lack of efforts by the authorities

concerned in furnishing compliance to audit observations.

3.7.2 Compliance to the ELA’s Annual Audit Reports

The Finance Department, GoB constituted (March 2010) three-tier

Committees – High Level, Departmental Level and District Level for review/

compliance of the ELA’s Annual Audit Reports. The District Level

Committee45

has the responsibility to ensure compliance of audit paragraphs/

reports received from ULBs of that district. The Department Level

Committee46

has to review the status of compliance made by the District

Level Committees and the High level Committee47

is to meet once in six

months to review the functioning of District Level and Department Level

Committees.

Audit observed that only one District Level Committee meeting was held for

ULBs during 2015-16. No meeting of Department Level and High Level

Committee was held during 2015-16 and therefore, the purpose of constitution

of these Committees was defeated and the audit observations contained in the

Annual Audit Report of ELA remained unattended.

3.7.3 Status of Local Bodies Report

As per provisions contained in Section 91(2) of the BM Act, 2007 (amended

in January 2014), the Annual Report on account of ULBs prepared by the

CAG shall be laid before both the Houses of State Legislature.

For the period up to 2013-14, Annual Audit Report of the ELA on Local

Bodies had been prepared and submitted to the State Government with a copy

to the respective departments. Though, the Local Bodies Reports for the

period 2012-13 and 2013-14 were laid before State Legislature (11 March

2016), arrangement for discussion of the reports in Public Accounts

Committee (PAC) or PAC like committees was not made. The first CAG’s

report on Local Bodies for the year 2014-15 was laid before both the Houses

of State Legislature on 4 April 2016 and GoB decided to discuss the report in

PAC. As of 23 January 2017, two meetings of PAC were held (June and

August 2016) to discuss the CAG's report on ULBs but no observations were

settled.

45

Headed by the District Magistrate/Deputy Development Commissioner 46

Headed by the Principal Secretary/Secretary of the UD&HD, GoB 47

Headed by the Principal Secretary to the Finance Department, GoB and the Pr. A.G.

(Audit), Bihar as a member


44

Accountability Mechanism and Financial Reporting issues

3.8 Accountability Mechanism

3.8.1 Lok Prahari (Ombudsman)

Section 44(1) of BM Act, 2007 provides for appointment of Lok Prahari

(Ombudsman) for looking into any allegation of corruption, lack of integrity,

malpractice etc., of the authorities of the ULBs. The qualification, terms and

conditions and tenure of appointment and the powers and duties of the Lok

Prahari (Ombudsman) shall be as may prescribed by the Government. The Th

FC had recommended to State Governments to put in place a system of

independent Local Body Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) as one of the eligibility

criteria, to draw down its general performance grant. The Lok Prahari

(Ombudsman) so appointed will look into complaints of corruption and

maladministration against the functionaries both elected and official, and

recommend suitable action. The Fifth SFC had also recommended a separate

Lok Prahari (Ombudsman) for ULBs. But, the Lok Praharis (Ombudsman)

had not been appointed by the UD&HD, GoB as of December 2016. The

UD&HD had drafted Ombudsman Rules (combined for UD&HD and PRD)

and shared with the PRD for their opinion, which was awaited for more than

two years as of December 2016.

3.8.2 Social Audit

The basic objective of the Social Audit is to ensure public accountability in the

implementation of projects, laws and policies through public participation.

The Fifth SFC recommended that Social Audit was to be conducted in ULBs

as an accountability measure and Social Audit for slum and poverty alleviation

programmes should be a must though the BM Act, 2007 does not provide for

Social Audit in ULBs.

The Additional Secretary, UD&HD stated that system for Social Audit had not

been established in ULBs till October 2016. Reasons for not establishing the

system of Social Audit were not provided by the UD&HD (December 2016).

3.8.3 Property Tax Board

Section 138(A) of BM Act, 2007 provides for putting in place a State level

Property Tax Board for independent and transparent procedure to optimise

assessment, collection and recovery of Property Tax. The Th FC had also

recommended the setting up of a State level Property Tax Board to assist the

ULBs to put in place an independent and transparent procedure for assessing

Property Tax. Though the Bihar Property Tax Board Rules, 2013 was framed

and notified (May 2013) by the UD&HD, GoB, constitution of the Board was

under process (October 2016).

3.8.4 Service Level Benchmarks

The Th FC recommended that the ULBs should accord priority to service

delivery and put in place benchmarks for essential civic services. As part of

this condition, the ULBs should notify every year, the standards to be achieved

by the end of the next fiscal year and publish the same in the State Gazette.


45

Accordingly, GoB framed Service Level Benchmarks (SLBs) for services

provided by the ULBs. Scrutiny of records of 11 Municipal Corporations

(MCs) revealed that most of the MCs could not achieve the standards of SLBs.

There was no achievement by five MCs in respect of sewerage treatment, less

than 50 per cent coverage of toilets in seven MCs and there was less than 20

per cent achievement in respect disposal of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in

10 MCs. Details of standards of SLBs and its status in 11 MCs are given in

(Appendix-3.2).

The Additional Secretary, UD&HD stated (October 2016) that it was made

mandatory from January 2016 for all ULBs of the State to announce service

level benchmarking with budget.

3.8.5 Fire Hazard Response

As per Th FC recommendation, all Municipal Corporations with a population

of more than one million (2001 census) must put in place a fire hazard

response and mitigation plan for their respective jurisdictions.

The UD&HD, GoB had notified (March 2011) the Fire Hazard Response and

Mitigation Plan for Patna Municipal Corporation. But, the Plan was not put in

place as of February 2016.

3.8.6 Submission of Utilisation Certificates

Rule 342 (1) of BFR provides that utilisation of the grants is to be submitted

by the grantee entities within 18 months from the date of receipt of the grants.

The instruction contained in the allotment letters of the funds released to the

ULBs also required furnishing of the Utilisation Certificates (UCs) to the

State Government within the prescribed period.

The UD&HD, GoB could not provide status of pending UCs, however, as

per UCs compiled by the AG (A&E), the UD&HD released grants of

` 10261.62 crore to ULBs during 2003-15 (up to July 2015) under various

assistance grant heads but, UCs of ` 4223.56 crore (41 per cent) were pending

as of 2 February 2017. Year wise details of UCs pending are given in

Table 3.8 below:

Table-3.8: Year wise details of UCs pending (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Year Grants released UCs pending Percentage of UCs

pending

2003-12 4107.71 1308.68 31.86

2012-13 1376.53 240.47 17.47

2013-14 1736.19 635.39 36.60

2014-15 2229.12 1394.67 62.57

2015-16 (Up to July 2015)

812.28 644.35 79.33

Total 10261.62 4223.56 41.16

(Source: Information provided by O/o the AG (A&E), Bihar)

UCs pending for such a long periods showed weak internal control and fraught

with risk of misutilisation of funds.


46

3.9 Financial Reporting Issues

3.9.1 Source of Funds

3.9.1.1 Sources of Finances

The ULBs receive funds for execution of development works from

Government of India (GoI) and the State Government in the form of grants.

The GoI grants include grants devolved under recommendation of the Central

Finance Commission (CFC). The State Government grants are received

through devolution of net proceeds of the State own tax revenue on

recommendations of the State Finance Commission (SFC) and grants for

implementation of State Sponsored Schemes. Besides, the ULBs had their

own sources of funds (tax and non-tax revenue). The Property Tax on lands

and buildings is mainstay of ULBs’ own revenue. Sources of finances of

ULBs are shown in Chart 3.4 below:

Chart - 3.4: Source of Funds

(Source: Section 127 of BM Act, 2007)

3.9.1.2 State Budget allocation vis-à-vis expenditure

The budget provisions made by the State Government to ULBs including

State share towards GoI Schemes and grants received under recommendations

of CFCs for the year 2011-16 are given in Table 3.9 below:

Grants Own Revenue

Revenue Sources of ULBs

Tax Revenue Non-Tax Revenue

Water Tax, tax on

vehicles, trades and

advertisement

Property Tax on

lands and buildings Rental income

User charges,

fees, tolls

GoI

GoB

Surcharge on transfer of

land/buildings, electricity

consumption,Entertainm

ent Tax


47

Table-3.9: Budget allocation vis-à-vis expenditure

(`̀̀̀ in crore) Sl.

No.

Particulars Head 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (3 to 7)

1. Budgetary

Allocation

Revenue 1374.83 1668.44 2537.40 3300.59 3111.15 11992.41

Capital 7.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 37.73 48.73

Total 1381.83 1670.44 2538.40 3301.59 3148.88 12041.14

2. Expenditure Revenue 661.37 1263.72 1717.44 1778.46 1977.47 7398.46

Capital 0 2.00 1.00 0 0 3.00

Total 661.37 1265.72 1718.44 1778.46 1977.47 7401.46

3. Saving (1-2) 720.46 404.72 819.96 1523.13 1171.41 4639.68

4. Percentage of saving 52 24 32 46 37 39

(Source: Appropriation Accounts of Government of Bihar)

It is evident from Table 3.9 above that the UD&HD could not utilise

budgetary allocation fully and percentage of saving ranged between

24 per cent and 52 per cent during 2011-16. Total allocation under Capital

head was less than one per cent of the total allocation during 2011-16 while

capital expenditure during 2011-12, 2014-15 and 2015-16 were nil.

3.9.1.3 Receipts and expenditure of grants by ULBs

The consolidated position of receipts and expenditure of grants by ULBs

under various schemes were not provided by UD&HD. However, as per

information furnished by the Support Programme for Urban Reforms

(SPUR)48

under UD&HD, status of grants received and expenditure in

28 ULBs49

for which accounts were maintained by SPUR during the years

2012-16 is shown in Table 3.10 below whereas, details are given in

(Appendix-3.3).

Table - 3.10: Receipt and Expenditure of 28 ULBs (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Particulars 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

1. Opening Balance 330.98 430.08 641.89 835.84

2. Receipts 300.79 444.33 735.17 667.33

3. Fund available (1+2) 631.77 874.41 1377.06 1503.15

4. Expenditure 201.66 296.60 589.40 574.31

5. Percentage of Utilisation 32 34 43 38 (Source: Data provided by SPUR, UD&HD)

The above position indicates that only 32 to 43 per cent of available funds

were utilised during 2012-16. The UD&HD did not provide figure of funds

available/released and utilisation thereof in respect of other ULBs.

48

A GoB initiative funded by the United Kingdom’s Department For International

Development (DFID) to provide financial, technical and managerial support to enhance

efficacy of ULBs. 49

Ara, Aurangabad, Begusarai, Bettiah, Bhagalpur, Biharsharif, Bodhgaya, Chhapra,

Danapur, Darbhanga, Dehri, Gaya, Hajipur, Jamalpur, Katihar, Khagaul, Kishanganj,

Motihari, Munger, Muzaffarpur, Nawada, Patna, Phulwarisharif, Purnea, Saharsa,

Sasaram, Sitamarhi and Siwan


48

3.9.2 Centrally/State Sponsored Schemes

GoB received grants from GoI for execution of Centrally Sponsored Schemes

viz., Rajiv Awaas Yojana (RAY), Integrated Housing and Slum Development

Programme (IHSDP), Water Supply (State Plan) and Swarna Jayanti Shahari

Rozgar Yojana (SJSRY)/National Urban Livelihoods Mission (NULM).

However, the percentage of utilisation of grants ranged between 65 per cent

and 92 per cent as detailed in Table 3.11 given below:

Table-3.11: Receipt and Expenditure of Centrally/State Sponsored Scheme (`̀̀̀ in crore)

Scheme 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Total Utilisati

on

(%) Receipt Exp. Receipt Exp. Receipt Exp. Receipt Exp. Receipt Exp. Receipt Exp.

RAY* -- -- -- -- -- -- 149.15 0.67 -- 96.93 149.15 97.60 65.43

IHSDP 47.11 - 227.55 9.46 44.33 70.85 -- 185.43 117.73 137.61 436.72 403.35 92.35

Water Supply

(State Plan) 63.27 61.39 34.87 30.83 235.00 182.76 200 168.46 154.50 142.18 687.64 585.62 85.16

SJSRY 47.76# 6.05 35.81 61.70 29.38 2.52 1.99 19.55 -- -- 114.94 89.82 78.14

NULM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50.71** 34.44 50.71 34.44 67.91

(Source: Data provided by UD&HD, GoB) # including OB of ` 45.66 crore; * Rajeev Awaas Yojana launched in 2014-15; ** ` 50.71 crore includes OB of ` 25.12 crore transferred from SJSRY. SJSRY renamed as NULM from September 2013 but grants were released for NULM from 2015-16.

Audit further observed that grants under RAY amounting to ` 149.15 crore

was released on 20 November 2014 but only 65.43 per cent of the grants was

utilised as of August 2016.

3.9.3 State Finance Commission (SFC)

GoB constituted (December 2013) the Fifth SFC for the period 2015-20 in

pursuance of the Article 243-Y read with Article 243-I and Section 71 of BM

Act, 2007 to review the financial position of Local Bodies and to recommend

the principles to govern the distribution of net proceeds of taxes, duties etc.,

between the State and the Local Bodies. Though the report of the Commission

was due on 31 March 2015, it was however submitted in February 2016.

Consequently, the State Government had decided to implement the

recommendations of the Fifth SFC from the year 2015-16 with some minor

amendments in the recommendations vide details in (Appendix - 3.4).

Though the amount of share of ULBs in State Own Tax Revenue and grants

for the year 2015-16 were to be released in toto, GoB released grant of

` 434.64 crore only against entitled amount of ` 781.32 crore for the year

2015-16 at the fag end of the financial year (21 March 2016). The first

instalment for the year 2016-17 amounting to ` 462.93 crore was released in

October 2016, though it was due in May 2016 while second instalment was

not released (February 2017) to ULBs in want of Utilisation certificates of

grants released as first instalment.


49

3.9.4 Maintenance of records

Rules 12, 69, 84 and 103 of Bihar Municipal Accounting Rules, 2014

prescribe maintenance of basic records, registers for transparency,

accountability and proper watch.

Scrutiny of records (2015-16) revealed that 15 test checked ULBs did not

maintain50

key records viz., Accountant Cash Book, Grant Register, Asset

Register and Stock Register. Executive Officers of the ULBs concerned

replied that the records would be maintained in future.

3.9.5 Maintenance of Accounts by ULBs

The Ministry of Urban Development, GoI in consultation with the CAG

prepared (2004) the National Municipal Accounts Manual for maintenance of

accounts on accrual basis by the ULBs. Section 86, 87 & 88 of the BMA,

2007 also stipulate that the State Government shall prepare a Bihar Municipal

Accounting Manual for implementation of accrual based Double Entry

Accounting System and the Chief Municipal Officer shall within four months

of the close of a year, cause to prepare a financial statements consisting of a

Fund Flow Statement, an Income and Expenditure Account, Receipt and

Expenditure Account and a Balance Sheet for preceding year.

The UD&HD approved and notified Bihar Municipal Accounting Manual (21

March 2016) after nine years of enactment of BM Act, 2007. It was observed

that 13 test checked ULBs51

did not prepare the financial statements for the

period 2012-16 (Appendix-3.5). The Executive Officers of the ULBs

concerned replied that the financial statements would be prepared in future.

The UD&HD notified (January 2014) the ‘Bihar Municipal Accounting Rules,

2014’ for preparation and maintenance of financial statements on accrual

based Double Entry System in the municipalities (1 April 2014).

However, The Additional Secretary, UD&HD stated (October 2016) that the

ULBs were maintaining their accounts on both of the single entry and double

entry system in parallel and as soon as the new Double Entry Accounting

System is migrated in all aspect and runs smoothly, the old accounting system

would be discontinued.

50

Accountant Cash Book-Nagar Parishad Barh and Saharsa; Nagar Panchayat

Barbigha and Bikramganj Grant Register-Nagar Parishad Barh and Motihari; Nagar

Panchayat Barbigha, Beerpur, Bikarmganj, Kataiya, Makhdumpur, Nokha Asset

Register-Nagar Parishad Barh, Hajipur and Nawada; Nagar Panchayat Bikaramganj,

Kanti, Kataiya, Makhdumpur, Motipur, Nokha, Sahebganj Stock Register-Nagar

Parishad Barh and Dumaron; Nagar Panchayat Kataiya. 51

Nagar Parishad - Dumraon, Mokama , Nawada and Saharsa Nagar Panchayat -

Amarpur, Barbigha, Kanti, Katiaya, Makhdumpur, Nawgachhiya, Nokha, Bikram and

Bikramganj


50

3.9.6 Impact of Audit

In respect of 13 audit observations relating to six ULBs52

issued during June

2015 to February 2016, ` 33.69 lakh collected on account of Holding Tax and

miscellaneous receipts by the municipal staff was not deposited into account

of ULBs, the same was deposited by the person(s) concerned in course of

audit.

52

Barauli (` 3.75 lakh), Bhabhua (` 0.21 lakh), Hilsa (` 0.50 lakh), Khagaul (` 2.51 lakh),

Sheikhpura (` 3.39 lakh) and Siwan (` 23.33 lakh).

CHAPTER-IV

PERFORMANCE AUDIT

URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT

4.1 Utilisation of Grants under Civic Amenities Head (State Plan) by

Nagar Nigams

Executive Summary

A Performance Audit on 'Utilisation of Grants under Civic Amenities Head

(State Plan) by Nagar Nigams’ covering four sampled Nagar Nigams viz.,

Bhagalpur, Biharsharif, Gaya and Patna for the period 2011-16 was conducted

from June to August 2016 and the major findings are as follows:

The Development Plan for providing Civic Amenities was not prepared by the

test checked Nagar Nigams and development works executed by them were not

part of district plan prepared by District Planning Committees.

(Paragraph 4.1.6.1)

Grants amounting to ` 4.07 crore were lapsed and an expenditure of ` 10.56 crore

was incurred on inadmissible item of works by Biharsharif and Patna Nagar

Nigams.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.6 & 4.1.8.8)

In four test checked Nagar Nigams, grants amounting to ` 48.19 crore meant for

civic amenities viz park, special sanitation etc. were not utilised for a period

ranging from one to seven years as required land was not made available.

(Paragraph 4.1.7.2)

Utilisation Certificates of ` 79.35 crore (56.62 per cent) were not submitted by

the four test checked Nagar Nigams to the State Government.

(Paragraph 4.1.7.4)

Additional liability of ` 83 lakh was created in construction of two parks. Out of

six parks physically verified, two parks constructed at a cost of ` 51.25 lakh were

found locked, filthy and not put to use.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.1)

Expenditure of ` 1.58 crore incurred on construction of nine public conveniences

was rendered unfruitful as the same were not handed over by Bihar Rajya Pul

Nirman Nigam Limited to Nagar Nigam Patna.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.7)

The Patna Nagar Nigam did not execute an agreement with allottees of Deluxe

Public Conveniences since June 2010. This resulted in loss of revenue of ` 1.54

crore as the leased amount was not realised.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.7) Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Limited awarded 23 work orders aggregating

` 7.33 crore to contractors on nomination basis.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.8)


52

Consultancy fee on preparation of DPRs was enhanced by ` 56.37 lakh based on

demand of consultants rather than by tender or other competitive bidding by

Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.2)

Without getting Administrative Approval, Bihar Urban Infrastructure

Development Corporation Limited constructed 117 Bus Queue Shelters and

created additional liability of ` 6.35 crore.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.2)

By ignoring the request of Bihar Raj Pul Nirman Nigam Limited, Bihar Urban

Infrastructure Development Corporation sustained an avoidable loss of

` 27.60 lakh on dismantled 10 Bus Queue Shelters.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.2)

The electrical work of ` 81.05 lakh for repair of Maurya Lok Complex (a shoping

complex) was awarded to a contractor who was not holding a license or

experience for electrical works.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.7)

Failure to construct 2,940 individual toilets despite availability of ` 1.87 crore

forced people of 2,940 households compelled to continue with open defecation

under Bhagalpur Nagar Nigam.

(Paragraph 4.1.8.4)

4.1.1 Introduction

The Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992, gave Urban Local

Bodies (ULBs) the status of local self-government and entrusted comprehensive

powers to them for providing civic amenities in urban areas. Government of Bihar

(GoB) also framed the Bihar Municipal Act 2007 which provided various

responsibilities under Section 45 to be exercised by the Municipalities in the

sphere of Public Health and Sanitation.

The Urban Development and Housing Department (UD&HD), GoB released

grants to the Nagar Nigams (NNs) under State Plan head during the period 2011-

16 for providing civic amenities such as construction of Town Halls, Bus Stands,

Guest Houses, Street Lights/High mast lights, Auditoriums, Ghats and Parks.

4.1.2 Organisational Set Up

The NNs are under the administrative control of UD&HD, GoB headed by the

Principal Secretary.The Municipal Commissioner (MC) appointed by the State

Government is the executive head of a Nagar Nigam.

The NNs had an Empowered Standing Committee (ESC) comprising Councillors/

Members elected by the people and is headed by the Mayor elected from amongst

the Councillors. The executive power of the NN is exercised by the ESC. The

organisational structure of NNs is depicted in Chart- 4.1 below:

Chapter - IV: Performance Audit

53

Chart- 4.1

4.1.3 Audit Objective

The objectives of the Performance Audit (PA) were to assess whether:

• the NNs prepared a Development plan for utilisation of grants for the

civic amenities;

• grants received were adequate to provide the civic amenities and were

utilised economically, efficiently and effectively; and

• the execution under civic amenities were as per the Development plans

of NNs and/or conditions of grants and /or directives of the Government.

4.1.4 Audit Criteria

Audit criteria for the Performance Audit were:

• Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992;

• Bihar Municipal Act, 2007;

• Bihar Municipal Accounting Rules (BMAR), 1928 and 2014;

• Bihar Financial Rules, 2005;

• Bihar Public Works Department Code; and

• Guidelines/sanctioning letters of scheme (s)/programmes relating to civic

amenities and orders of Government of Bihar.

4.1.5 Scope of Audit and the methodology

The PA conducted during June - September 2016 covered all the eight

components53

of civic amenities under State Plan during the period 2011-16. The

53

Bus stand, community hall, Guest house/Town hall, ghats, infrastructure in slums, park,

Traffic light/public conveniences/Maurya Lok complex and special sanitation

Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam

• Controller of Municipal Finance & Accounts

• Municipal Internal Auditor

• Chief Municipal Engineer

• Municipal Architect and Town Planner

• Chief Municipal Health Officer

• Municipal Law Officer

• Municipal Secretary

• Additional/Joint Municipal Commissioners

Principal Secretary (UD&HD)


54

PA commenced with an Entry Conference (19 May 2016) with the Special

Secretary, UD&HD, GoB wherein audit objectives, audit scope, audit criteria etc.,

were discussed. The field audit involved test-check of records in four NNs54

including records of Parallel Bodies55

(PBs) such as Bihar Urban Infrastructure

Development Corporation Ltd (BUIDCO), District Urban Development Agency

(DUDA), Bihar State Housing Board (BSHB) and Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman

Nigam Limited (BRPNNL).

Four NNs were selected by using Simple Random Sampling without Replacement

(SRSWOR) method. The draft report was forwarded to UD&HD

(19 October 2016) to confirm facts and figures. Exit Conference was held

(19 December 2016) with the Special Secretary UD&HD wherein audit findings

were discussed and their replies have been suitably incorporated.

The field audit also involved physical verification of construction sites with

officials of the NNs/PBs. Photographs were also included as part of audit

evidence in cases where irregularities were noticed during physical verifications.

Audit Findings

4.1.6 Planning

Planning is a basic function involving formulation of one or more detailed plans

to achieve optimum balance of needs or demands with available resources.

Planning process identifies the objectives to be achieved, formulates strategies to

achieve them, arrange or creates the means for it and implements, directs and

monitors all steps in their proper sequence.

4.1.6.1 Preparation of Development Plan

Article 243ZD(1) of the Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act

envisaged that District Planning Committees (DPC) should be constituted in

every district to consolidate plans for providing civic amenities prepared by the

Panchayats and the Municipalities in the district and to prepare a draft

development plan for the district as a whole. Such a consolidated plan is

submitted to the State Government for approval. Further, Bihar Municipal Act

(BM Act), 2007 stipulated that every Municipality shall prepare plans for

development and social justice and shall implement such plans and carry out such

functions as may be assigned to it in this behalf.

Audit observed that test checked NNs had not prepared the development plans for

providing civic amenities. As a result, no consolidated development plans by the

DPCs were available for execution by the NNs. Further, NNs did not prioritise

the needs of urban people for economic development and social justice as

envisaged in the Seventy-Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act.

54

Bhagalpur, Biharsharif, Gaya and Patna 55

Parallel/Parastatal Bodies means a company or agency owned or controlled wholly or

partly by the government. Due to poor staffing and technical incapabilities of the ULBs,

a number of Parallel Bodies (PBs) viz., BUIDCO, BUSTL, Bihar Urban Development

Agency (BUDA), BRJP etc., were created for performing various functions of

Municipality


55

The failure to prepare development plans resulted in works remained unexecuted

as land was not available, proper place for providing civic amenities for optimum

use was not identified, works got delayed, created assets were not maintained or

put to use etc. As a result, 35 per cent of grants released during 2011-16 remained

unutilised.

NNs replied that the works for providing civic amenities were selected by

UD&HD without assessing the basic needs of NNs and feasibility of the works.

The Special Secretary, UD&HD replied in Exit Conference that development plan

in respect of civic amenities were not prepared by the NNs.

4.1.7 Financial Management and Fund Flow

The NNs receive funds for execution of various civic amenities from the State

Government in the form of grants and devolution of net proceeds of State Own

Tax Revenue on the recommendations of the State Finance Commission (SFC).

4.1.7.1 Release and utilisation of grants

The position of funds provided by GoB under civic amenities Head (State Plan)

to ULBs of the State during the year 2011-16 are given in the Chart 4.2 below:

Chart-4.2

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

17.2252.86

212.02

300.04

170.64

0

100

200

300

400

Total Grants received

under civic amenities

(Source: Grant sanctioning/allotment letters of the UD&HD, GoB)

The test checked four NNs received funds of ` 136.97 crore under eight

components of civic amenities under State plan during 2011-16 as detailed in

Table 4.1 below;


56

Table-4.1: Component wise allocation of funds

(` ` ` ` in crore)

Sl.No. Civic amenities components Funds allocated

during 2011-16

1 Park 13.03

2 Bus stand/Bus stop 26.23

3 Construction of ghat 6.30

4 Infrstructure development in slum 20.89

5 Construction of community hall 3.35

6 Construction of guest house/Town hall 0.65

7 Traffic lights and Public convenience 39.43

8 Special sanitation 27.09

Total 136.97 (Source: Grant sanctioning/allotment letters of the UD&HD, GoB)

Against total allotment of ` 136.97 crore, ` 104.26 crore was utilised for civic

amenities during 2011-16. The position of funds available and expenditure

incurred by test checked NNs during 2011-16, is given in Table 4.2 below:

Table-4.2: Funds Available and Expenditure for the sampled NNs

(`̀̀̀ in crore) Year Opening

balance

Funds

received

Total

Funds

Transfer

to Parallel

Bodies

Expenditure

/utilisation by

NNs

Total

Expenditure

Closing

balance

percentage of

Utilisation by

NNs

1 2 3 4 (2+3) 5 6 7(5+6) 8(4-7) 9

2011-12 2.51 0.28 2.79 0.00 0.05 0.05 2.74 17.85

2012-13 2.74 7.03 9.77 4.56 0.24 4.80 4.97 3.41

2013-14 4.97 10.75 15.72 5.94 1.48 7.42 8.30 13.76

2014-15 8.30 69.32 77.62 46.25 0.73 46.98 30.64 1.05

2015-16 30.64 49.59 80.23 19.25 25.76 45.01 35.22 51.94

Total 136.97 76.00 28.26 104.26 20.63

(Source: Information furnished by test checked NNs)

Audit observed that 55 per cent56

of the total grants received by NNs were

transferred to PBs (Appendix-4.1) and only 45 per cent was left with NNs for

execution of development works. Thus, more than 50 per cent of works for civic

amenities were executed without involving the ULBs.

In the year 2014-15, only 1.05 per cent of total grants were spent mainly due to

unavailability of land for construction of Samrat Ashok Bhawan at all the four

test checked NNs and delay in tendering process for execution of works for

infrastructure development in slums at Bhagalpur and Biharsharif NNs..

Further, the above table indicates poor utilisation of grants by NNs and PBs as

closing balance showed an increasing trend from ` 2.74 crore (2011-12) to

` 35.22 crore (2015-16) during five years while utilisation by NNs ranged from

one per cent (2014-15) to fifty two per cent (2015-16) of available grant during

the period 2011-16.

56

55 per cent of fund received (` 136.97 crore) = ` 76 crore


57

4.1.7.2 Failure to utilise grants

In four test checked NNs and PBs, grants amounting to ` 24.11 crore and

` 24.08 crore out of ` 136.97 crore and ` 43.17 crore respectively released during

2011-16 were not utilised as of August 2016 and remained in different Saving

Accounts of bank/Treasury for a period ranging from one to seven years as

required land was not made available by the four test checked NNs and because

of absence of demand for construction of park by a works division concerned of

NN Patna (Appendix-4.2).

4.1.7.3 Maintenance of Cash Books

Rule 63 to 65 of BMAR, 1928 stipulate that Accountant of the Municipality shall

keep a cash book and record the transactions pertaining to cash receipts and

disbursements of the Municipality. The cash book shall be closed daily, the totals

for the end of the day being struck and the closing balance worked out with detail.

Rule 118 of the BMAR, 2014 stipulates that within fifteen days from the end of

the month, reconciliation shall be carried out between the balances shown in cash

book and in the treasury/bank pass book. A monthly bank reconciliation

statement duly signed by the Accountant for each bank account shall be prepared.

Further, as per Rule 12 of BMAR, 2014, the cash book shall be closed daily and

the totals for the end of the day being struck and the closing balance worked out

and the Chief Municipal Officer shall examine the entries and the closing balance

in the cash book and affix his signature in token of such examination.

Audit observed that cash book was not maintained by NN Patna whereas in the

three other test checked NNs cash books were neither closed daily nor signed by

the Municipal Commissioners. Monthly bank reconciliation statements duly

signed by the Accountant were also not prepared by three sampled NNs.

The Controller of Municipal Finance and Accounts (CMFA), NN, Patna replied

(July 2016) that cash book was not maintained as regular Accountant was not

posted whereas the other NNs did not provide any response.

Deficient maintenance of cash book in three NNs not only violated the provisions

of aforesaid rules but also indicated lack of financial propriety and absence of

internal controls. Further, in NN Patna receipts of grant, interest earned from

bank, position of cheque issued, cheque bounced, revalidation of cheque,

misappropriation, diversion of fund, position of outstanding advances and its

adjustment, position of cash in hand and at bank could not be ascertained due to

its failure to maintain cash book.

4.1.7.4 Utilisation Certificates (UCs)

For timely utilisation and proper monitoring of the grants released, the NNs were

required to submit UCs to the State Government as per conditions laid down in

the grant sanctioning letters. Scrutiny of records of funds released to the four test

checked NNs revealed that the UCs of ` 79.35 crore (56.62 per cent) were not

submitted to the State Government as detailed in the Table 4.3 below:


58

Table-4.3: Pending Utilisation Certificates (` ` ` ` in crore)

(Source: Information furnished by the test checked NNs)

In absence of UCs, utilisation of grants for intended purposes could not be

ascertained.

The CMFA of NN Patna replied (July 2016) that out of ` 64.24 crore transferred

to the PBs, UCs of ` 12.02 crore only was made available by them which was not

tenable as the NN should have monitored the utilisation of grant by PBs.

4.1.8 Execution of Works

4.1.8.1 Parks

Construction of parks

GoB released grants of ` 11.56 crore for construction of 17 parks under NN Patna

(Appendix-4.3) during 2009-16. Out of the total 17 parks to be constructed by

NN/PBs, 10 parks were completed with an expenditure of ` 10.08 crore whereas

seven parks remained incomplete as of August 2016. Audit observed the

following irregularities:

Out of the total 10 completed parks, three57

were neither handed over for their

operation and maintenance to NN Patna. The lack of operation and maintenance

made the parks not suitable for recreation and the intended purpose of providing

green spaces could not be achieved. Further, it was also observed that electricity

connection was not available for illuminating lights and operation of fountains.

The District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, DUDA, Patna replied that the two

parks58

, would be handed over to the agency concerned once the completion

certificate from DUDA was received. The reply was inconsistent as the Executive

Engineer (EE), DUDA had already requested (December 2013) to the District

Planning Officer working under District Magistrate Patna for transfer of park.

The EE, BSHB replied that in absence of guidelines from GoB, the park at MIG

Lohiyanagar was not handed over to any agency.

In two parks59

, expenditure of ` 3.65 crore was incurred against the

Administrative Approval (AA) of ` 2.82 crore resulting in creation of additional

liability of ` 83 lakh.

57

100 MIG Park No.9, Lohiya Nagar (BSHB), Park in Anand Vihar Colony near temple,

Park behind Rajendra Nagar near telephone exchange (DUDA, Patna) 58

Park in Anand Vihar Colony near temple, Park behind Rajendra Nagar near telephone

exchange (DUDA, Patna) 59

MIG Park at Hanuman Nagar (BSHB), Kankarbagh (Administrative Approval-

` 92.65 lakh, Expenditure-` 106.44 lakh), S.K. Puri Children Park, Patna (BRPNNL)

(Administrative Approval- ` 189.23 lakh, Expenditure-` 258.49 lakh)

Name of NNs Receipt of fund Utilisation certificates

pending Period Amount

Bhagalpur 2012-13 to 2015-16 27.81 23.17

Biharsharif 2013-14 to 2015-16 11.95 9.03

Gaya 2011-12 to 2015-16 16.18 16.18

Patna 2012-13 to 2015-16 84.22 30.97

Total 140.16 79.35


59

The EE, BSHB accepted the findings whereas Senior Project Engineer, BRPNNL

replied that the excess expenditure was incurred in anticipation of administrative

approval from the department. The reply was not tenable as AA of UD&HD was

to be obtained prior to commencement of the work.

NN and DUDA, Patna failed to start construction of two parks60

despite

availability of ` 73.36 lakh for one to four years.

The CMFA, NN, Patna replied that in absence of demand from the EE of Works

Division concerned, works on construction of a park was not started. Reply was

not acceptable as NN had to monitor the progress of works.

A joint physical verification of six Parks61

out of the 10 completed parks revealed

that two parks62

constructed at a total cost of ` 51.25 lakh were in a filthy

condition and not put to use. Tiles/granites were found broken/damaged as the

operation and maintenance of parks were not handed over to NN Patna

100 MIG Park No.-9 at Lohiyanagar

(Completed in July 2015) but not put in use.

Park behind Rajendra Nagar Telephone

Exchange (Completed in October 2013 but not

maintained)

Park at Anand Vihar colony completed in September 2014 was not handed over

to NN Patna for its operation and maintenance, though, it was found in good

condition. However, items63

worth ` 2.01 lakh were not found in place.

60

Janta PRDA flat Park ` 17 lakh and Park in veterinary college campus ` 56.36. 61

Park behind Rajendra Nagar Telephone Exchange, Park in Anand Vihar Colony (ward

No.-2) near temple, MIG Park at Hanuman Nagar (BSHB), Kankarbagh, S.K. Puri

Children Park, Patna (BRPNNL) , 100 MIG Park No. 9 at Lohiyanagar, Rajbanshi Nagr

Park, Patna. 62

100 MIG Park No. 9 at Lohiyanagar, Park behind Rajendra Nagar Telephone Exchange. 63

Dustbin (` 0.24 lakh), Fiber Bench (` 0.76 lakh), Sign Board (` 0.07 lakh), HPSV Street

light (` 0.50 lakh), Swing (` 0.44 lakh).


60

Similarly, in Rajbanshi Nagar park Patna, a fountain worth ` 1.81 lakh was not

found in place.

Beautification of park (Hiranya Parbat)

Hiranya Parbat, Biharsharif, Nalanda is a tourist place. Beautification of Hiranya

Parbat, was planned to be done with an objective to improve the local economy

by increasing tourism and also to generate revenue for the NN. Accordingly, NN

prepared estimate worth ` 4.85 crore with a provision of centage of ` 18.56 lakh

(four per cent of the estimated cost) and allotment of ` 4.85 crore was made by

the UD&HD. The work was awarded to a firm at 4.64 per cent above the Bill of

Quantity (` 2.84 crore) and was to be completed by January 2016. However, the

work remained incomplete as of August 2016. Audit further observed that

provision of centage in the estimate was not to be made by the NN as the

development of park was one of the core functions of NN.

Clause 6 of Standard Bidding Document (SBD) envisaged that measurement of

all items having financial value shall be entered in Measurement Book (MB) so

that a complete record is obtained of all works performed under the contract.

Audit observed that work valued ` 1.27 crore was booked in MB on percentage

basis and as such actual work done by the contractor could not be ascertained.

Audit observed that 866 Reinforced Concrete Cement (RCC) slabs along Hedge

Plants parallel to red stone passage were constructed at the cost of ` 17.75 lakh at

` 2,050 each slab (1st Running Bill), However, in the second, third and fourth

running account bills, cost was calculated for the said 866 numbers of RCC Slabs

at ` 2,500 each slab which resulted in excess payment of ` 4.08 lakh.

The MC Biharsharif accepted the audit observation and replied that excess

payment of ` 4.08 lakh would be adjusted from the next bills which was yet to be

adjusted (February 2017). On the issue of provision of centage of ` 18.56 lakh, it

was replied that directions would be obtained from UD&HD. The reply was not

acceptable as the NN cannot charge centage for providing civic amenities to

public as it is the core function of NN.

Anand Vihar Colony Park (completed in September 2014 but not handed over to NN Patna for maintenance)


61

4.1.8.2 Construction of bus stands and bus queue shelters

With a view to provide better infrastructure to urban population, UD&HD, GoB

mandated BUIDCO for development of bus depots throughout the State. During

2011-16, UD&HD released ` 26.24 crore to BUIDCO through four test checked

NNs for construction of bus stand and bus queue shelters.

Detailed Project Report (DPRs) for bus stands

BUIDCO fixed (July 2013) the fees for reimbursement of consultancy charges for

preparation of DPRs for construction of bus stands at 1.25 per cent of the

sanctioned project cost upto ` 50 crore with six consultants64

. A meeting for

awarding work for preparation of 47 DPRs of bus stand was held (May 2014) in

which only four empanelled65

consultants out of six were invited but, only three

consultants participated in meeting. The consultants requested for increase in rate

from 1.25 to 1.75 per cent of the sanctioned project cost which was accepted by

BUIDCO and accordingly an agreement was executed with the consultants.

Thus, all the empanelled consultants were neither given an opportunity for

participation in meeting nor any open tender was invited for getting competitive

rates. It was also noticed that consultancy fee on preparation of 36 DPRs (July

2016) was enhanced by ` 56.37 lakh based on demand of consultants rather by

tender or other competitive bidding.

Project Director (PD), BUIDCO replied that the fee was increased in the meeting

held (May 2014) under the chairmanship of the then Managing Director

BUIDCO.

Out of 36 DPRs prepared, six66

were prepared without getting no objection

certificates from land owners67

. As a result, work on five bus stands could not be

started due to objections of land owners and one bus stand was not constructed at

Sahebganj, Muzaffarpur due to encroachment of land. Construction work of

remaining 30 bus stands was in progress as on February 2017. As availability of

land was not ascertained prior to preparation of DPRs, an expenditure of ` 19.11

lakh (Appendix-4.4) incurred on consultancy fee towards preparation of the six

DPRs proved wasteful.

Construction of bus stands

GoB released grants of ` 18.74 crore for construction of five bus stands in the test

checked NNs (Appendix-4.5). Out of five bus stands, two works were in progress

whereas three works were not started as of August 2016.

64

1. M/s EDMAC Eng. consultant 2. M/s Kapoor & Associates 3. M/s Sen & Lall

Consultant (p) Ltd. 4. M/s Vivek Bhole Architect 5. M/S Black Ink 6. M/s Architect Hafiz

consultant 65

1. M/s EDMAC Eng. consultant 2. M/s Kapoor & Associates 3. M/s Sen & Lall

Consultant (p) Ltd.4. M/s Vivek Bhole Architect 66

.Bus stand at Nawada, Manpur(Gaya), Purnia, Sahebganj, Motipur, Chakia 67

Zila Parisad Nawada, Gorakshini Committee Gaya, Animal Husbandry Department

Purnia, Nagar Panchyat Sahebganj, Public works Department, Motipur Muzaffarpur,

Nagar Panchyat,Chakia


62

BUIDCO failed to start the construction of three bus stands68

despite availability

of ` 12.73 crore since March 2013 to November 2014. Audit observed that works

were not started as land was not made available by two NNs and administrative

approvals for Inter State Bus Terminal, Patna were not received from UD&HD.

BUIDCO accepted the audit findings.

Construction of bus queue shelters (BQSs)

To cater huge volumes of passenger buses, autos and tempos, GoB released

` 7.50 crore to NN Patna during 2014-15 for construction of 104 BQSs in Patna.

Audit observed that:

The Bihar Public Works Department Code, provides that every work initiated or

connected with the requirements of another department, it is necessary to obtain

the concurrence of the department concerned before technical sanction to the

work is accorded. The formal acceptance by the department concerned is termed

AA of the work.

DPR for construction of 208 BQSs in Patna with an estimated cost of ` 15 crore

was prepared by BUIDCO. Before getting AAs of the department, BUIDCO

finalised tenders for ` 13.72 crore and constructed 117 BQSs. But, the department

accorded AAs of ` 7.50 crore only for construction of 104 BQSs. When the

demand for additional amount of ` 6.35 crore was placed, the department

requested to complete the construction of BQS from the sanctioned amount and

refused to sanction further amount. Thus, without getting AAs of UD&HD,

BUIDCO constructed 117 BQS and created additional liability of ` 6.35 crore.

The PD, BUIDCO replied that Principal Secretary, UD&HD, in a meeting (April

2015), directed officials of UD&HD to make available the remaining funds.

However, UD&HD had not sanctioned the remaining amount (September 2016)

The BRPNNL requested (September 2014) to stop the work of ten BQSs69

at the

stretch of road from Lalit Bhawan to Vidyut Bhawan due to initiation of the

project work of flyover, under- pass and multi junction interchange. But, ignoring

the request, BUIDCO constructed BQSs on this stretch.

Joint physical verification revealed that work on the project had begun and

BRPNNL dismantled (August 2016) five BQSs and the remaining five BQSs

were to be dismantled soon.

68 Bhagalpur, Gaya and Inter State Bus Terminal at Patna 69 Lokyukta office (UP & Down), Bihar Public Service Commission (UP & Down), Income

Tax Chauraha (UP & Down), Mount Camel School, High Court and Vikash Bhawan

(UP & Down)


63

Dismantled BQS near Lalit Bhawan, Patna Dismantled BQS near Bihar Public Service

Commission office, Patna

Hence, by ignoring the request of BRPNNL, BUIDCO sustained an avoidable

loss of ` 27.60 lakh (Appendix-4.6) on the dismantled ten BQSs.

Project Director BUIDCO replied that the BQSs were constructed and

inaugurated before the request of BRPNNL. The reply was not acceptable since at

the time of request from BRPNNL (September 2014) the work of jungle cleaning

only was done as per MB (13 October 2014).

Separate tender was required to be floated for advertisement in the BQS for

revenue generation which could be used for its operation and maintenance. Audit

observed that the construction of BQSs was completed in March 2015. However,

tenders for advertisements were not awarded to any agency till August 2016

Thus, financial resource could not be raised for maintenance of BQSs.

As per grant letter, the constructed BQSs were to be handed over to Bihar Urban

Transport Corporation Ltd. (BUTCL). But the BQSs were not handed over to

BUTCL. As a result, BQSs were not being operated and maintained.

It was observed during joint physical verification of sixty BQSs that twenty nine

were encroached, buses were not stopping at fifty eight BQSs, time-table of the

buses plying through the route was not displayed at any of the BQSs and

electricity connection was not provided to any of the BQSs.

BQS at Shiv Mandir, Bailey Road was

encroached.

BQS at BMP-16 was encroached and a hotel

was running in it.

As the constructed BQSs were not handed over to BUTCL for operation and

maintenance, BQSs constructed at a cost of ` 13.85 crore failed to cater to

passengers and are prone to encroachment, damage and destruction.


64

A beneficiary survey of 64 beneficiaries was conducted with the Deputy Project

Director, BUIDCO (November 2016) which also confirmed the audit findings

and are summarised below:

Criteria Response

Whether BQSs were used by the

public

56 per cent stated that BQSs were not utilised by the public.

Whether the City Buses stops near

the BQSs

88 per cent stated that city buses did not stop near BQSs.

Whether people gathered near

BQSs for boarding in buses

66 per cent stated that people did not gather near BQSs for boarding

in buses

Whether BQSs were maintained

properly

83 per cent stated that BQSs were not maintained.

The BQSs were utilised by whom 97 per cent stated that BQSs were being utilised unauthorisedly viz.,

by Vendors, Nursery etc.

4.1.8.3 Construction/renovation/beautification of Pond/Ghat

GoB released ` 13.27 crore for construction of ghat70

at Gaya (2012-15). Audit

observed that plan and DPR was not prepared and Technical Sanction (TS) was

not obtained from the competent authority71

and the work was completed with a

delay of six months without assigning any reason. As per conditions of contract,

penalty at 10 per cent of estimated cost i.e., ` 13.23 lakh (Estimated cost

` 132.28 lakh) was not deducted which resulted in excess payment of ` 13.23

lakh to the contractor.

On this being pointed out, the MC Gaya replied (February 2017) that the

contractor was instructed by the former Minister, UD&HD and the

Commissioner, Magadh Division to stop the work during Pitri Paksha Mela.

Reply of MC Gaya was not tenable as no documentary proof of instruction

regarding stopping the work was made available to audit. Further, the total period

of Pitri Paksha Mela was 15 days only but the extension was granted for more

than six months without justification.

During joint physical verification of Sangat Ghat to Gayatri Ghat on north side of

Dev Ghat, it was found that many slabs of ghat were cracked and uprooted from

riser steps and one Mini High Mast light of ghat was not functioning.

Construction of steps, pathway and beautification with plantation and desilting

of Brahmsarovar

GoB released (October 2010) ` 80 lakh for beautification/renovation of Kagwali

sarovar under NN, Gaya. Audit noticed that the work was split in two72

parts.

The first work was decided to be taken up with an objective to prevent the

pollution of sarovar from dirty water and waste that emanates from houses

around it by constructing pathways/steps around the sarovar so as to provide a

clean sarovar to the pilgrims visiting for Pind Dan.

70

Sangat Ghat to Gayatri Ghat on north side of Dev Ghat 71

From Superintending Engineer instead of Chief Engineer 72

(i) Construction of Steps, Pathway and beautification with plantation and de-silting of

Brahmsarovar, Ward No. 45 (Estimated cost ` 70.15 lakh) and (ii) Beautification of

Kagwali Bedi situated at Brahma sarovar (Estimated Cost ` 8.95 lakh).


65

Audit observed that the TS was not obtained from the competent authority. As per

work order, the work for construction of steps, pathway, beautification with

plantation and de-silting of Brahmsarovar was to be completed by February

2012. However, the work could not be started in time due to dispute at the work

site.

The work was started in June 2012 only. However, the Contractor requested

several times for cost revision due to time overrun which was denied by the NN.

The contractor was directed (April-May 2015) by the NN to complete the work at

the earliest with a warning that if the work was not completed, his registration

would be cancelled, the firm would be blacklisted and First Information Report

(FIR) would be lodged against him. But, the work was neither completed by the

contractor nor any action was initiated against him by NN, Gaya (August 2016).

However, the second part of work worth ` 8.95 lakh was completed

(September 2012).

Pollution control works not executed in Bhramsarovar at Kagwali under NN Gaya

The MC Gaya replied that action would be taken against the contractor and

admitted that TS from competent authority was not obtained. Thus, due to

stoppage of work midway for more than three years, the intended objective of

preventing the pond from being polluted and facilitating the pilgrims a clean

sarovar for Pind Dan, could not be achieved thereby rendering an expenditure of

` 37.85 lakh, unfruitful.

4.1.8.4 Infrastructure Development in Slums

GoB sanctioned (December 2013 and July 2014) ` 45.25 crore to BUDA for

infrastructure development in slums under four sampled NNs.

Audit observed:

Of the total 4,488 DPRs prepared (2014) for construction of toilets, only 1,548

individual toilets were completed in the first phase, and despite availability

` 1.87 crore under infrastructure development in slums 2,940 toilets were not

constructed. As 2,940 individual toilets were not constructed, people of 2,940

households were compelled to continue with open defecation under Bhagalpur

Nagar Nigam. The MC, Bhagalpur replied that due to delay in preparation of

DPR, execution of works got delayed.


66

Para 15 of guidelines for infrastructure development work in slum stipulated that

in case of individual toilets, share73

of the beneficiary had to be deposited in the

special bank account of the Samuh Vikas Samitee (SVS). Audit observed that

shares of the beneficiaries of 30 SVSs amounting to ` 17.74 lakh (Appendix-4.7)

were not deposited in the special bank account of the SVSs. Instead, separate

registers were maintained which did not prove that the shares of beneficiaries

were utilised on the works of construction of individual toilets. NN Bhagalpur

replied that direction would be issued to SVS for deposit of share of beneficiary

in special bank account of SVS.

Para 8 of the guidelines stipulated that 10 per cent of sanctioned estimated

amount should be transferred as advance to the account of registered SVSs for

execution of individual toilets and hand pumps. Thereafter, 30 per cent of the

estimated amount would be released in instalments on production of complete

details of every expenditure to ULBs. However, NN Bhagalpur released ` 32.42

lakh to SVSs without obtaining complete details of expenditure in the prescribed

format indicating weak financial control. NN Bhagalpur replied that details of

expenditure would be obtained from the SVS which is not tenable as NN had to

take the details of expenditure prior to release of fund.

As per guidelines, development work in slums was to be completed in two parts,

In first part construction of individual toilets and installation of hand pumps was

to be executed through SVS and in second part construction of road, drain,

community hall and installation of solar street lights was to be executed by e-

tendering. UD&HD accorded AA of ` 13.09 crore in first phase for infrastructure

development in 46 slums under NN Bhagalpur.

Audit observed that ` seven crore was allotted for execution of works under

second part. Provision of construction of Paver Block road worth ` 4.96 crore

was made in the initial estimate. However, the same was changed to PCC road for

` 6.24 crore without obtaining revised AA. Accordingly, work order for ` 5.71

crore was issued and payment of ` 2.82 crore was incurred (August 2016). As a

result, fund fell short to ` 74.55 lakh for construction of community hall and

installation of street lights, Community Toilet and water post. The execution of

PCC road without an AA and with a financial implication of ` 74.55 lakh not

only resulted in compromising with some development items of second part of

the works but also prevented these slums from upgrading and delisting from

slum.

Audit observed during physical verification that:

• Electrical fittings were not found in 81 individual toilets of five slums74

under NN Bhagalpur. In Mushahari tola slum, at a place drain was found filled

with soil.

• In Refugee tola slum, roads were built in areas where there were no slums.

73

` 1500 or ` 1000 in case of digging foundation and pit of the toilet by beneficiary himself 74

Mushahari Tola in ward 29, Passi Tola Barari in ward no. 28, Refuzee colony in ward

no. 28, Makbara Harijan Tola in ward no. 2, Dhobi Tola in ward no. 26


67

• Provision for electricity, Boring and Motor for supply of water was not

made in the estimate. As a result, water tank and connecting pipes for the tanks in

community hall at Dhaniya Bagicha, Gaya remained unutilised (December 2015).

Drain filled with soil in Mushahari Tola

slum Bhagalpur

Roads were laid between houses in

Refuzee Tola slum Bhagalpur

Unutilised water

tank/pipes in

Community Hall at

Dhaniya Bagicha,

Gaya

A beneficiary survey of 251 beneficiaries was conducted with officials of NN

Bhagalpur (November 2016) and findings are summarised below:

Criteria Response

Whether the individual toilets

have been constructed by

SVS/NN, Bhagalpur

A total of 37 per cent of beneficiaries stated

that individual toilets were not constructed by

NN Bhagalpur.

If no, what is the arrangement

for toilets

Eighty eight per cent beneficiaries stated that

they resorted to open defecation as no

arrangements were made.

Is the arrangement for

electricity made by SVS/NN,

Bhagalpur

Seventy nine per cent of beneficiaries stated

that provision for electricity was not made.

If no, is there any difficulty in

the use of toilets in absence

of electricity.

Nearly 61 per cent beneficiaries described the

difficulties they faced in absence while using

toilets.

4.1.8.5 Construction of Community Hall

Allotment of ` three crore was made (December 2011) for construction/Extension

/Renovation of Community Halls to DUDA, Gaya as detailed in Table 4.4 below:

Table-4.4: Construction/renovation/extension of community halls

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

Sl.

no.

Allotment

No. /Date

Name of

the

Executing

Agency

Name of the Scheme Amount

sanctioned

Expenditure

1. 41 /29.12.11 DUDA,

Gaya

Extension of Community Hall

near Bageshwari Temple,

Gaya

0.65 0.42

2. -Do- -Do- Construction of Community

Hall near Chand Chaura

Akhara, Gaya

0.40 0.40

3. -Do- -Do- Construction of Community

Hall in Akshayavat, Gaya

1.25 1.25

4. -Do- -Do- Renovation and Beautification 0.70 Nil


68

of Azad Park-cum-

Community Hall, Gaya

Total 3.00 2.07

(Source: Allotment letter and information provided by Nagar Nigam, Gaya)

Thus, out of a total grant of ` three crore, ` 0.93 crore75

remained blocked as of

August 2016 due to dispute at worksite at Azad Park Community Hall and tender

for remaining works76

of Maa Bageshwari Temple Gaya was not invited

(August 2016).

As envisaged in the Clause 2 of the Conditions of Contract, the Contractor shall

pay as compensation, an amount equal to half per cent on the amount of the

estimated cost of the whole work for every day that the work remains not

commenced after the specified date subject to a maximum of 10 per cent of the

estimated cost of the work.

Audit observed that Community Hall in Akshayvat was completed with a delay of

48 days without assigning any reason. However, only ` 0.86 lakh was deducted

for delay from the final bill of the contractor against the deductible amount of

` 11.19 lakh (10 per cent of estimated cost of ` 111.90 lakh) which resulted in

excess payment of ` 10.33 lakh to contractor. EE, DUDA accepted excess

payment of ` 10.33 lakh and replied that action is being taken for recovery of

balance amount (23 February 2017).

4.1.8.6 Construction of Town Hall (Samrat Ashok Bhawan)

Grants released under construction of Samrat Ashok Bhawan, Bus stand and for

Special Sanitation drive to two NNs77

amounting to ` 6.57 crore78

during 2014-16

lapsed as the moneys were not drawn from the treasury. Out of ` 6.57 crore,

` 2.50 crore revalidated by UD&HD for Patna NN in 2015-16 and ` 4.07 crore

was lapsed. Though, the Municipal Commissioner was responsible for drawl of

grants from the treasury, no records were available to indicate that such a

monitoring was done by the Municipal Commissioner.

CMFA, NN Patna replied (July 2016) that the Treasury Officer objected to the

drawl as the allotment was more than the Budget Provision. However, it was

noticed that the matter was not further taken up with the UD&HD. As a result,

urban citizens were deprived of the amenities.

4.1.8.7 Construction of public conveniences

The UD&HD accorded AA (January 2010) and made allotment of ` 5.94 crore to

BRPNNL for construction of 32 numbers of public conveniences at different

locations in Patna at ` 18.54 lakh each. Subsequently, these conveniences were to

be handed over to NN Patna to enhance its source of income.

75

Azad Park cum Community Hall - ` 70 lakh and Community Hall near Bageshwari

temple - ` 22.86 lakh 76

Electrification, sanitation and water supply, landscape, furniture and fixture. 77

Gaya, Patna 78

Construction of Samrat Ashok Bhawan, Gaya- ` 0.58 crore, Construction of Bus Stand

Patna- ` 2.50 crore and Special Sanitation drive ` 3.49 crore.


69

All the 32 public conveniences were constructed during the period November -

December 2009. Out of these 32 public conveniences, 10 were not handed over to

NN Patna even after a lapse of more than six years of its construction.

These 10 public conveniences79 were physically verified by audit and it was found

that nine out of 10 were not in use since construction and the one at Indira Gandhi

Institute of Medical Sciences campus was being used and maintained by the

hospital which was also confirmed during beneficiary survey of 177

Beneficiaries.

Public Convenience at

Vikas Bhawan, Patna


Bihar School

Examination Board


Maurya Lok

Public Convenience at Jai

Prabha Hospital

Thus, the purpose of providing public conveniences and to increase the source of

income of NN Patna was defeated as the nine public conveniences were not

handed over to NN Patna which rendered the expenditure of ` 1.58 crore80

unfruitful.

Senior Project Engineer, BRPNNL replied (July 2016) that NN Patna was

requested to take over the public conveniences but they did not respond.

Loss of revenue

Rule 73(A)(4) of Bihar Municipal Accounts Rules (BMAR) 1928 stipulates that

every municipal executive and servant should realise fully and clearly that he will

be held personally responsible for any loss sustained by the commissioners of a

municipality through fraud or negligence on his part and that he will also be held

personally responsible for any loss arising from fraud or negligence on the part of

any other municipal servant to the extent to which it may be shown that he

contributed to the loss by his own action or negligence.

Scrutiny of records (December 2015) of the Patna Nagar Nigam revealed that as

per orders (September 2009) of Urban Development and Housing Department

79

1. BMP-5, 2. Jaiphabaha Park, 3. In front of Mahaveer Aushadhalaya, Kankarbagh, 4.

Maryalok Complex, 5. BSEB Office, 6. Vikash Bhawan, 7. Gardanibag Stadium, 8.

IGIMS, 9. Gai Ghat, 10. Civil Court, Gai Ghat. 80

Expenditure incurred (` in lakh) at 1.BMP- ` 15.57, 2. Side of Jaiprabha Park- ` 15.17,

3. Kankarbag in front of Mahavir Aushadhalay- ` 18.07, 4. Maurya Lok Complex near

Raj Tower- ` 18.26, 5. Near Bihar School Examination Board Office- ` 18.80, 6. Vikash

Bhawan New Secretariat- ` 18.45, 7. Gardanibag Stadium near Gardanibagh Hospital-

` 18.16, 8. Gai Ghat Patna- ` 17.94, 9. Civil Court Gai Ghat Patna- ` 17.94


70

(UD&HD), Government of Bihar, 33 Deluxe Public Conveniences (DPCs)

having toilets, urinals and wash basins were to be handed over by the BRPNNL

to the NN Patna by 30 October 2009 for operation and maintenance and to

increase the source of revenue of the NN Patna. But, only 12 DPCs were actually

transferred to NN Patna (February-August 2010) by BRPNNL. These DPCs were

allotted (June 2010) to four agencies by the NN Patna with a condition to deposit

50 per cent of lease amount and to execute agreement within one week from the

date of allotment. As per term and conditions framed by the NN Patna, the

allotment was to be made for five years but lease amount was to be fixed

separately for each year for each DPCs.

It was noticed that the NN Patna did not execute any agreement with the agencies.

Further, against total demand of ` 34.03 lakh for the year 2010-11, the allottees

deposited ` 15.98 lakh (July-September 2010) only but the NN Patna did not

initiate any action against them and the DPCs continued to be in possession of the

allottees for the period ranging from July 2010 to August 2015. The allottees also

did not pay the balance amount till September 2016. As the NN Patna failed to

execute any agreements with the allottees to whom the 12 DPCs were allotted in

June 2010, the NN Patna could not realise the leased amount of ` 1.54 crore

(Appendix-4.8) for the period ranging from July 2010 to August 2015.

On this being pointed out in audit, the Additional Municipal Commissioner

(Revenue), NN Patna replied (March 2016) that NN Patna could not realise the

leased amount because agreements were not executed with the allottees by the

then Chief Municipal Engineer, NN Patna and necessary action would be initiated

for recovery of the amount from the then Chief Municipal Engineer.

The matter was reported to the Government (June 2016); reminders issued

(August 2016 and November 2016), their reply was awaited.

Repair of Maurya Lok Complex, Patna

GoB released grants of ` four crore (April 2014) for repair of Maurya Lok

Complex81

Patna. The work was completed with an expenditure of ` 3.09 crore

(April 2015). Audit observed that:

The electrical work of ` 81.05 lakh was awarded to a contractor who was not

holding a license or experience for electrical works. During joint physical

verification, it was noticed that electricity cables in Maurya Lok complex were

arranged in haphazard way. Electricity panel (Bus Bar) for connection to the

shops was installed but not a single connection was taken from the same and the

work was completed with a delay of five months.

81

Market/Office Complex


71

Disarranged Electricity cables in Maurya Lok complex Electricity panel (Bus Bar) for

electricity connection to the

shops at Maurya Lok complex

Out of three toilets physically verified, two toilets were found locked and the key

of one locked toilet was in unauthorised possession. Taps were missing and

partition between the urinals of toilet was short.

4.1.8.8 Special Sanitation

The grants for comprehensive improvement in sanitation across the municipal

area were to be utilised on six components viz., door-to-door waste collection,

purchase of equipment for collection of waste, purchase/development of landfill

sites for waste management, assistance in generation of compost/electricity from

the waste, de-silting, cleaning and consolidation of drains and providing

manpower for special sanitation drive of public places. Further, the release of

next year’s grants was based on evaluation of expenditure on all prescribed

components of current year’s grants by the UD&HD.

Expenditure on inadmissible components

Audit observed that two NNs incurred an expenditure of ` 10.56 crore out of total

grants of ` 20.60 crore during 2015-16 on components other than the prescribed

ones as detailed in Table 4.5 below:

Table- 4.5: Expenditure on inadmissible works (`̀̀̀ in crore) Name of

Nagar

Nigam

Total

Amount of

Grant

received

Admissible

components of

sanitation works

Items on which

expenditure incurred

Amount

Biharsharif

2.92 Door-to-door waste

collection, purchase

of equipment for

collection of waste,

purchase/development

of landfill sites for

waste management,

assistance in

generation of

compost/electricity

from the waste, de-

silting.

Salary of regular sanitation

staff

1.22

Salary of Daily Wages

sanitation staff

0.71

Patna

17.68 Daily wages payment 7.50

Night Sanitation 0.13

Purchase of Apron 0.01

Chhath Ghat Scheme 0.99

Total 20.60 10.56

(Source: Information provided by the test checked NNs)

Violation of the provisions for utilisation of grants defeated the purpose of the

scheme. The MC, Biharsharif and the CMFA, NN Patna accepted the findings and

replied (July 2016) that ex-post facto approval of the department would be


72

obtained. However; the department refused to grant ex-post-facto approval

(August 2016).

Irregular award of contract on nomination basis

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) re-emphasised (July 2007) that

tendering process or public auction was a basic requirement for the award of

contract by any Government agency as any other method especially award of

contract on a nomination basis, would amount to a breach of Article 14 of the

Constitution of India guaranteeing the Right to Equality. Further, as per the

Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave Petition (Civil)

No. 10174 of 2006, Government contracts shall be normally awarded by the

State, its corporations, instrumentalities and agencies through public

auction/public tender.

Audit observed that BRPNNL in contravention of the CVC Guidelines awarded

23 work orders aggregating to ` 7.33 crore to contractors on a nomination basis.

It was further observed that the award of aforementioned Government contracts

on a nomination basis by the BRPNNL was not under exceptional circumstances

and reasons for the same were also not placed on record.

Senior Project Engineer, BRPNNL replied (July 2016) that awarding contract on

nomination basis has now been completely stopped.

4.1.9 Monitoring and Supervision

As envisaged in the grant sanctioning/allotment letters, periodic monitoring and

supervision of the above works were to be done by the District Magistrates.

However, in all four NNs and PBs, no record was available to indicate that such

monitoring was done as a result expenditure incurred on inadmissible works,

assets created but not put to use, assets created but not handed over to the

agencies concerned to ensure their operation and maintenance.

As per Para 16 of the guidelines for infrastructure development in slums, engineer

appointed under UTAST (Urban Technical Assistance Support Team) and

Municipal Engineer with chairman of SVS (Samuh Vikas Samiti) or any other

nominated member would daily inspect the quality of works. Further, UTAST

engineer would also inspect the quality of works once in a week. In case of any

deficiency in the quality of works the matter would be reported to the Municipal

Commissioner. Engineer of UTAST and Municipal Engineer with chairman of

SVS would record their comments in the site inspection book. But, Site

inspection book for ascertaining the inspection done by the Engineer of UTAST

and Municipal Engineer with chairman of SVS was not available at NN

Bhagalpur. NN Bhagalpur replied that payment was made only after satisfactory

execution of works which was not tenable as site inspection book was not

available to prove that regular inspection was done to assess the quality of works.

4.1.10 Conclusion


73

Test checked NNs did not prepare the development plans for providing civic

amenities and the development works were executed without being included in

district development plan consolidated by the DPC.

The Scheme was not implemented effectively as evidenced from the failure to

utilise more than 50 per cent of available funds, lapsed grants of ` 4.07 crore,

expenditure incurred on inadmissible works, assets created but not put to public

use, assets created but not handed over to the agencies concerned to ensure their

operation and maintenance.

Works were executed without Administrative Approval and awarded on

nomination basis.

DPRs were prepared and funds released to executing agencies without assessing

feasibility of works which resulted in blockade of grants. Thus, objectives of the

Scheme to provide civic amenities to urban population could not be achieved

fully.

4.1.11 Recommendations

• Urban Local Bodies should prepare development plan and submit to DPC

for consolidation and inclusion in district development plan.

• UD&HD and NNs should take necessary steps for optimum utilisation of

available grants for admissible items of work.

• UD&HD should see that assets created by the PBs are put in public use

and be transferred to the agencies responsible for operation and its maintenance.

• UD&HD and NNs should establish effective mechanism for internal

control to avoid lapse of grants, maintenance of cash book and reconciliation of

bank accounts with cash books and to submit UCs timely.

Chapter – V

Compliance Audit


5.1 Irregular/Unfruitful expenditure

The Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana (SJSRY), a centrally sponsored

scheme was launched (December 1997) with the objective to provide gainful

employment to the urban unemployed or underemployed through Skill Training

for Employment Promotion amongst Urban Poor (STEP-UP) to enable them to

access the employment opportunities opened up by the market or undertake self-

employment. SJSRY was restructured and renamed as National Urban

Livelihoods Mission (NULM) in September 2013 and the Employment through

Skills Training and Placement (EST&P) was introduced in place of STEP-UP

under SJSRY.

Under STEP-UP, the agencies selected for imparting training were responsible

for 30 per cent placement of beneficiaries through employment or self-

employment whereas, in NULM, the ratio for placement of successfully trained

candidates was increased to a minimum 50 per cent.

Audit observed the following irregularities in implementation of the Scheme:

(i) A test-check (July 2015) of records of Nagar Parishad (NP) Sultanganj

revealed that allotment of ` 75 lakh was received (December 2012) by the NP for

all the five components under SJSRY out of which 40 per cent (` 30 lakh) was

earmarked for STEP-UP component. The physical target against the said

allotment under STEP-UP was 350 beneficiaries and target for placement of

trained beneficiaries was 105 (30 per cent of 350). For the purpose, the NP

executed an agreement with a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO)

‘Sambodhit’ and issued (October 2012) work order for imparting training in four

trades and paid advance of ` 14 lakh (during February-March 2013).

However, it was observed that the NP intimated (May 2013) the NGO that no

documents relating to the training were submitted by the NGO. Despite that, the

Executive Officer (E.O), NP paid an additional amount of ` 14 lakh to the NGO

(between July and August 2013). Subsequently, the NGO submitted a final bill of

Nagar Parishad, Sultanganj made irregular payment of `̀̀̀ 50 lakh on

training component of SJSRY due to lack of observance of Scheme

guidelines. In eight ULBs, NGOs failed to provide employment to trained

beneficiaries despite an expenditure of ` 3.91 crore over their training.


76

` 69 lakh for imparting training to 690 beneficiaries (September 2013) instead of

the target of 350 beneficiaries.

The E.O of the NP intimated (September 2013 and November 2014) the NGO

that the bills submitted by them were fake and therefore, the claim regarding

training imparted was not accepted by the NP and issued (December 2013)

warning to the NGO for submission of fake bills of ` 69 lakh and for recovery of

the amount paid to them. Instead of initiating further action against the NGO for

furnishing fake bills, the E.O of the NP made (February 2014) additional

payment of ` 22 lakh to the NGO. Thus, the amount of ` 50 lakh82

paid to the

NGO by the NP was irregular as it was made without proof of training imparted

by the NGO.

The present EO of the NP replied (February 2016) that no records were available

in the NP to prove that training was imparted by the NGO and advance paid to

the NGO was in contrary to Government’s instruction. It was also stated that the

payment was made without checking the compliance of the conditions laid down

by the Government.

The matter was reported (March 2016) to the UD&HD and Principal Secretary,

UD&HD directed (May 2016) the District Magistrate (DM) Bhagalpur to

investigate the matter and take action accordingly. Principal Secretary, UD&HD

intimated (September 2016) that the necessary documents regarding imparting of

training were made available by the NGO (June 2016) to NP office and audit

may check the documents.

An audit team visited the NP office (October 2016) to verify the documents and

noticed that the bills were not passed by the E.O, BPL status of the beneficiaries

was not verified, approval of imparting training to 690 beneficiaries instead of

approved target of 350 was not given, receiving of the beneficiaries on bill of tool

kits distribution etc. were not available. The E.O, NP also stated (November

2016) that the records submitted by the NGO were not genuine and action for

recovery of the amount paid to the NGO was being initiated.

ii) The target set by the State Government to eight ULBs for imparting

training to beneficiaries under STEP-UP during 2012-13 and NULM for

the period 2013-16, the achievement thereof and the amount paid to NGO for

training are given in Table 5.1 below:

82

` 14 lakh + ` 14 lakh + ` 22 lakh

Chapter-V; Compliance Audit

77

Table- 5.1: Targets and achievement of test checked ULBs

Component Year Target

(number of

beneficiaries)

Achievement

(number of

beneficiaries)

Amount paid

to the NGO

(` in crore

Percentage of

achievement

STEP-UP

2011-12 No target set No achievement 3.14 Nil

2012-13 3350 4168 124

EST&P

2013-14 8400 Nil 0.77 Nil

2014-15 No target set No achievement Nil

2015-16 9720 4860 50

Total 21470 9028 3.91

(Source: Government letters and information furnished by ULBs)

Of the total eight ULBs83

two ULBs84

failed to achieve the desired target

(achievement ranged from 28 - 45 per cent) under STEP-UP and all the eight

ULBs failed to achieve the desired target under EST&P mainly due to delay in

selection of agencies for providing training.

Further, it was also observed that placement was not provided to 3681

beneficiaries to whom training was imparted by the NGO though the payment of

` 3.91 was released to them on the condition that placement would be given to

the trained beneficiaries. This rendered the expenditure of ` 3.91 crore incurred

for providing training to beneficiaries, unfruitful.

The matter was reported to the Government (November 2016); their reply was

awaited.

5.2 Loss of tax revenue

Section 127 (13) (i) of the Bihar Municipal (Amended) Act (BM Act), 2011,

stipulates that the Municipality shall carry out upward revision of rental value of

holdings85

once in every five years and Section 127(7) (iii) of BM Act

(Amended), 2013 states that the rental value per square feet of the built-up area

for different classes of holdings86

shall be increased by minimum 15 per cent

83

Ara, Banka, Bhagalpur, Chhapra, Jamui, Purnea, Sasaram and Sheohar 84

Ara and Banka 85

Holdings mean land held under one title or agreement and surrounded by one set of

boundaries. 86

Residential, Commercial; Pucca, Asbestos buildings; Self-occupied, tenant occupied

buildings etc.

Annual Rental Value of holdings was not revised by minimum

15 per cent every five years and Property Tax was levied at a rate below

the prescribed minimum rate which led to a loss of tax revenue of

`̀̀̀ 36.56 lakh.


78

after every five years. Further, Section 127(8) of the Act ibid provides that

Property Tax shall be levied by the Municipality within a minimum 9 per cent

and a maximum 15 per cent of Annual Rental Value (ARV)87

of lands and

buildings and no Municipality shall reduce the rate of tax already in use between

the minimum and maximum provided for without the prior approval of the State

Government.

Audit observed that ARV of the holdings was not revised by the Patna Municipal

Corporation (PMC) and the Jamalpur Nagar Parishad after every five years,

whereas the Amarpur Nagar Panchayat levied Property Tax at a rate below the

minimum prescribed rate nine per cent of ARV as detailed below:

(i) Scrutiny of records (March 2016) of the PMC for the period 2014-15 revealed

that ARV of holdings was last revised in 1995-96 and thereafter not revised till

March 2016, though fourth revision was due in the year 2015-1688

. In PMC,

ARV of 1033 test checked holdings89

was ` 6.42 crore as per the revision done in

the year 1995-96. Due to this low ARV of the test checked holdings, the PMC

sustained minimum loss of ` 17.32 lakh during 2014-16.

On this being pointed out in audit (March 2016), the Additional Municipal

Commissioner, PMC replied (March 2016) that ARV was not increased in the

light of instructions (October 2013) of the Urban Development and Housing

Department (the Department). He further stated that the Department was

requested (August 2015) for approval of the revision of the ARV and the matter

was pending with the Department. The reply was not tenable as the Department

had already issued (December 2013) instructions and notified (January 2014) the

revision of ARV of the holdings by 15 per cent in every five years. Moreover,

records showed that the PMC did not request the department (October 2013) for

approval of revision of the ARV of holdings.

(ii) In Jamalpur Nagar Parishad (Nagar Parishad), it was observed (May 2016)

that the last assessment of ARV of holdings was done in the year 2007-08 and

since then the Property Tax was being realised on that basis till March 2016,

though the revision was due in 2012-13. As a result, the Nagar Parishad sustained

minimum loss of Property Tax of ` 13.27 lakh during 2014-16.

87

ARV = Carpet area X Rental value X Occupancy factor X Multiplying factor 88

First revision was due in 2000-01, second in 2005-06, third in 2010-11 89

Demand of only 1033 holdings was made available to audit.


79

On this being pointed out, the Executive Officer of the Nagar Parishad replied

(May 2016) that revaluation of holdings were under process. The reply was not

acceptable as the revision in ARV was due in the year 2012-13 and should have

been revised since then.

(iii) In Amarpur Nagar Panchayat (Nagar Panchayat), it was observed that

instead of minimum nine per cent of the ARV, Property Tax was levied

arbitrarily at the rate of six per cent of the ARV and realised Property Tax

accordingly since April 2006. As a result, Nagar Panchayat sustained loss of

Property Tax of ` 5.97 lakh for the period 2014-16.

The Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat replied that since April 2016 the

tax was being collected at the rate of nine per cent of ARV. The reply was not

tenable as the Department had already issued instructions regarding levy of

Property Tax at minimum nine per cent of ARV.

Thus, the failure of Municipal Bodies to follow the provisions of the BM Act and

instructions of the Department regarding revision of Property Tax at the interval

of every five years and levy of tax not below the rate of nine per cent of ARV

resulted in loss of property tax amounting to ` 36.56 lakh90

.

The matter was reported to the Government (July 2016); reminder issued

(November 2016), their reply was awaited.

5.3 Irregular payment of advances

Rule 131(P), (Q) (1) of the Bihar Financial Rules (BFR) stipulates that,

ordinarily, payments for services rendered or supplies made should be released

only after the services have been rendered or supplies made. Further, while

making advance payments, adequate safeguards/Performance Security in the

form of Demand draft, Bank Guarantee etc., (five to ten per cent of the value of

the contract) should be obtained from the firm to ensure due performance of the

contract.

Scrutiny (February 2016) of records of Nagar Parishad (NP), Siwan revealed that

in a meeting of the Purchase Committee, the work for procurement and

installation of solar lights was awarded to an agency (February 2012) at a rate of

` 26,684 per unit under an agreement. Further, on the suggestion of the Chairman

of the NP to the Purchase Committee, a clause for maintenance of the solar lights

90

` 13.27 lakh + ` 17.32 lakh + ` 5.97 lakh = ` 36.56 lakh

Relevant financial rules were not observed by Nagar Parishad, Siwan in

payment of advance for maintenance of solar lights that led to irregular

payment of ` ` ` ` 80.87 lakh to the agency.


80

for the period of 10 years inclusive free maintenance of two years at a rate of

10 per cent per unit per year was included in the said agreement.

NP Siwan procured (February-April 2012) 330 solar lights from the agency and

the same were installed at specified places of the NP wards at a total cost of

` 88.06 lakh. As per agreement, the solar lights were to be maintained free of

cost for two years and thereafter paid maintenance had to be commenced from

February-April 2014. By ignoring the condition of the agreement, the NP Siwan

paid (September to December 2012) ` 41.08 lakh to the agency as maintenance

charges for 330 solar lights for five years in advance. Also, the test and trial of

the solar lights procured was not done before installation. Thus, an opportunity to

assess the performance of the agency during free maintenance period of two

years was lost by the NP due to payment of maintenance charges in advance and

financial interest was not saved.

Further, the NP executed an agreement with the same agency (20 December

2012) for procurement of 400 more solar lights at a rate of ` 23,000 per unit

wherein, a clause for maintenance of solar lights for five years inclusive of two

years free maintenance period was included. But, again, by ignoring the

condition of the agreement, NP Siwan paid (July- September 2013) ` 39.79 lakh

to the agency as maintenance charge of 400 solar lights for five years in advance.

On complaint of public, the NP Siwan issued (October - December 2013) notices

to the agency as most of the solar lights installed were not functioning and

instructed to maintain the same but the agency did not respond. The NP also

carried out (December 2013) an inspection to assess the status of functioning of

solar lights and found that a number of solar lights were not functioning due to

lack of maintenance and therefore, an explanation was sought (January 2014)

from the agency as to why the entire maintenance charge paid to him should not

be recovered as the solar lights were not maintained. But, the contractor neither

responded nor carried out the maintenance work.

When the matter was raised by audit, the Executive Officer, NP Siwan stated

(September 2016) that approval of the Chairman was taken before payment to the

agency. Reply was not acceptable as the NP not only paid full amount of

maintenance charges for two years before the commencement of the paid

maintenance period without obtaining Performance Security but also failed to

protect financial interest of the NP. Moreover, the Chairman did not have the

authority to sanction deviation from the provision of the financial rules.

Thus, it was evident that NP Siwan made an irregular payment of ` 80.87 lakh to

the agency by paying full amount of maintenance charges of 730 solar lights in

advance.


81

As the contractor failed to maintain the solar street lights since February 2012,

the lights became dysfunctional rendering the expenditure of ` 80.87 lakh

unfruitful.

The matter was reported to the Government (August 2016); reminder issued

(November 2016), their reply was awaited.

Appendix

83

Appendix – 2.1

(Refer: Paragraph – 2.1.1; Page- 19)

Statement showing main recommendations made by the Fourth SFC with regard to PRIs

Sl. No Main Recommendations

1. The accounting formats prescribed by C&AG should be adopted and accounting manuals be

finalised in consultation with Accountant General. The possibility of simplifying the formats may

also be explored.

2. Transfer of 3Fs should be expedited. It has to be done in such manner that regular government

employees are not put to any hardship and work of other departments if done by such employees

also does not suffer. The panchayats should also be in a position to exercise effective control over

the functionaries transferred.

3. Expenditure on current salary of employees working against sanctioned posts of the Local Body

employees should be borne by the government for another five years without any tapering.

4. Six activities have been identified as high priority for PRIs. These activities can primarily be

financed through devolution amount of share in state taxes. The estimated cost of these

programmes is ` 1,590 crore

5. To support the identified priority and other programmes of the local bodies a share of 7.5 per cent

in state's own tax revenue, net of collection costs should be devolved on to the Local Bodies.

6. Every year the share of Local Bodies should be released in two half yearly instalments.

7. Out of the total devolution as share in state taxes to Local Bodies 70 per cent should be for PRIs

and 30 per cent for the ULBs.

8. Among the PRIs the total devolved share in state taxes should be further shared in the proportion

70 per cent to Gram Panchayats, 20 per cent to Panchayat Samitis and 10 per cent to Zila

Parishads.

9. The 10 per cent share of The Zila Parishads should be distributed among the ZPS on the single

criterion of population of the district.

10. The 20 per cent share of Panchayat Samitis should be distributed among the PS.s on the criterion

of 80 per cent weight to population and 20 per cent weight to number of BPL families.

11. The 70 per cent share of the Gram Panchayats should be distributed equally among all GPS.

12. Arrears of retirement benefit to employees of local bodies should be cleared by giving a one-time

lump sum grant-in-aid.

13. The Panchayat Raj Institutions should be given grants from the Consolidated Fund of the State @

` 15 lakhs, ` 1 lakh, and ` 2 lakhs per annum to each Zila Parishad, Panchayat Samiti and Gram

Panchayat for capacity building.

14. The share in State taxes followed by the grants-in-aid to PS.s and ZPS shall be firstly put to use in

filling the gaps in the actual cost of execution of schemes identified as priority activities.

15. The untied amounts left after fulfilment of the requirement for priority activities shall be spent on

purposes consistent with the duties and functions stated in the Act. It will not be available for

payment of salary or purchase of vehicles without previous sanction of the state government.

16. The PRIs, especially the Zila Parishads, should strive to become financially self-reliant by raising

their own resources. This will also enable them to approach financial institutions for investment in

projects which will ensure that the prime lands available to them are put to profitable use. They

may also try to explore the possibility of creating assets by adopting the PPP mode.

17. The State Government is yet to prescribe the maximum limits of taxes that can be levied by the

PRIs with the result that these bodies do not levy any taxes at all. The State Government should

either notify these rates forthwith to enable the PRIs to raise resources or amend the law so that

there will be no need to have government approval.

(Source: Report of the Fourth State Finance Commission)


84

Appendix –2.2

(Refer: Paragraph- 2.1.3.4; Page – 22)

Statement showing status of works undertaken during 2011-16 in the Sampled Units under high priority sector

District/ Units Grant

received

Drinking Water Street lighting Brick soling and Drains Library Sanitation Inadmissible

Expenditure

Total

Grant

availa

ble

No.

of

wor

ks

Exp.

Grant

availa

ble

No.

of

wor

ks

Exp. Grant

available

No

of

wor

ks

Exp.

Grant

availa

ble

No.

of

wor

ks

Exp.

Grant

availa

ble

No

.

of

wo

rk

s

Exp.

No.

of

wor

ks

Exp.

No

of

wor

ks

Exp.

ZP Madhubani 446.04 70.25 61 9.76 72.48 0 0.00 272.98 130 357.16 14.27 0 0.00 16.06 0 0.00 35 134.44 226 501.36

PS Madhwapur 31.44 4.95 1 4.50 5.11 0 0.00 19.24 1 2.19 1.01 0 0.00 1.13 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 6.69

GP Basuki Bihar

North 7.93 1.25 1 0.70 1.29 0 0 4.85 3 12.66 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00

0 0.00 4 13.36

GPBalba 7.93 1.25 2 1.96 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 1.96

GP Sahar south 7.93 1.25 1 2.33 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 14 15.31 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 15 17.64

PS Jhanjharpur 39.40 6.21 2 6.23 6.40 0 0.00 24.11 4 13.03 1.26 0 0.00 1.42 0 0.00 0 0.00 6 19.26

GP Naruar 7.93 1.25 2 1.35 1.29 2 1.84 4.85 1 3.68 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 6.87

GP Sukhait 7.93 1.25 1 0.58 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 3 3.77 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 4.34

GP Sangram 7.93 1.25 3 2.32 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 1 1.44 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 3.76

PS Basopatti 37.56 5.91 72 41.99 6.10 0 0.00 22.98 2 7.54 1.20 0 0.00 1.35 0 0.00 0 0.00 74 49.53

GP Khauna 7.93 1.25 14 9.95 1.29 2 2.33 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 12.27

GP Hathapur Parsa 7.93 1.25 25 6.22 1.29 6 5.12 4.85 1 0.71 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 32 12.04

GP Birpur 7.93 1.25 15 10.36 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 15 10.36

PSLaukahi 44.04 6.94 6 10.47 7.16 0 0.00 26.95 19 52.75 1.41 0 0.00 1.59 0 0.00 0 0.00 25 63.22

GP Bangama south 7.93 1.25 3 2.03 1.29 1 0.93 4.85 7 13.15 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 11 16.11

GP Kukurdaura 7.93 1.25 5 2.85 1.29 3 1.30 4.85 11 13.45 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 19 17.60

GP Belhi

Bhawanipur 7.93 1.25 22 14.38 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 1 2.28 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00

0 0.00 23 16.65

GP Narendrapur 7.93 1.25 4 9.72 1.29 10 4.65 4.85 1 4.78 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 15 19.15

ZP Nalanda 260.70 41.06 740 132.41 42.36 0 0.00 159.55 24 17.50 8.34 0.00 9.39 0 0.00 0 0.00 764 149.91

PS Biharsharif 42.44 6.68 187 42.90 6.90 0 0.00 25.97 9 13.85 1.36 0 0.00 1.53 0 0.00 0 0.00 196 56.75

GP Sarbahadi 7.93 1.25 32 7.79 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 1 4.31 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 33 12.10

GP Meghi Nagwan 7.93 1.25 34 8.28 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 34 8.28

GP Dumrawan 7.93 1.25 34 7.36 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 1 5.20 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 35 12.56

GP Ranabigha 7.93 1.25 28 6.65 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 2 5.58 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 1 0.09 0 0.00 31 12.32

PS Rahui 33.21 5.23 177 40.25 5.40 0 0.00 20.33 8 6.75 1.06 0.00 1.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 185 46.99

GP Rahui 7.93 1.25 57 13.41 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 3 2.99 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 60 16.40

GP Supasang 7.93 1.25 62 10.47 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 2 4.81 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 64 15.28

GP Peshaur 7.93 1.25 40 9.55 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 2 2.83 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 42 12.38

PS Harnaut 37.35 5.88 211 47.34 6.07 0 0.00 22.86 5 7.42 1.20 0 0.00 1.34 0 0.00 0 0.00 216 54.77

GP Kolawan 7.93 1.25 47 10.38 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 1 4.02 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 48 14.40

GP Telmar 7.93 1.25 42 9.29 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 42 9.29

GP Poari 7.93 1.25 38 8.53 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 6 5.78 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 44 14.31

Appendix

85

PS Noorsarai 35.62 5.61 65 15.62 5.79 0 0.00 21.80 4 18.20 1.14 0 0.00 1.28 0 0.00 0 0.00 69 33.81

GP

Jagdishpur Tiyari 7.93 1.25 66 15.95 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 1 0.33 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00

0 0.00 67 16.27

GP Rasalpur 7.93 1.25 42 9.34 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 5 4.40 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 47 13.74

GP Nirpur 7.93 1.25 46 10.89 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 6 4.85 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 52 15.74

ZP Rohtas 271.85 42.82 62 161.33 44.18 0 0.00 166.37 56 110.78 8.70 0 0.00 9.79 0 0.00 1 4.30 113 276.41

PS Kochas 28.62 4.51 17 6.61 4.65 0 0.00 17.51 44 42.60 0.92 0 0.00 1.03 0 0.00 0 0.00 61 49.21

GP Laheri 7.93 1.25 5 4.82 1.29 9 7.34 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 12.16

GP Kochas 7.93 1.25 2 1.20 1.29 11 8.43 4.85 2 1.74 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 15 11.38

PS Dehri 29.61 4.66 2 3.90 4.81 2 5.44 18.12 17 38.92 0.95 0 0.00 1.07 0 0.00 0 0.00 21 48.25

GP Bahluari 7.93 1.25 2 1.20 1.29 4 2.72 4.85 11 12.55 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 18 16.59

GP Bahisaha 7.93 1.25 1 1.90 1.29 5 4.08 4.85 6 8.93 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 13 15.02

GP Majhiaon 7.93 1.25 1 0.99 1.29 14 10.34 4.85 1 2.08 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 17 13.53

PS Rohtas 19.24 3.03 113 24.53 3.13 0 0.00 11.77 0 0.00 0.62 0 0.00 0.69 0 0.00 0 0.00 113 24.53

GP Akabarpur 7.93 1.25 0 0.00 1.29 0 0.00 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

GP Samahutta 7.93 1.25 0 0.00 1.29 2 10.34 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 10.34

PS Sasaram 43.93 6.92 3 15.22 7.14 2 34.00 26.88 18 24.14 1.41 0 0.00 1.58 0 0.00 0 0.00 23 73.36

GP Karserua 7.93 1.25 7 4.20 1.29 4 10.32 4.85 1 2.08 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 12 16.59

GP Darigaon 7.93 1.25 0 0.00 1.29 18 13.02 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 18 13.02

GP Muradabad kala 7.93 1.25 3 0.77 1.29 16 12.76 4.85 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 19 13.52

GP Rampur 7.93 1.25 7 5.28 1.29 7 5.17 4.85 2 6.80 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 16 17.25

ZP Saran 373.98 58.90 8 15.28 60.77 0 0.00 228.88 125 359.69 11.97 0 0.00 13.46 0 0.00 0 0.00 133 374.97

PS Panapur 24.41 3.85 1 2.08 3.97 0 0.00 14.94 8 29.76 0.78 0 0.00 0.88 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 31.83

GP Totaha Jagatpur 7.96 1.25 14 11.28 1.29 4 3.64 4.87 1 1.88 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 20 16.91

GP Bankwa 7.96 1.25 12 10.48 1.29 0 0.00 4.87 1 2.33 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 12.93

PS Isuapur 29.35 4.62 42 23.99 4.77 0 0.00 17.96 4 2.60 0.94 0 0.00 1.06 0 0.00 0 0.00 46 26.59

GP Agauthar Sunder 7.96 1.25 5 4.53 1.29 5 3.15 4.87 6 7.60 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 17 15.39

GPAata Nagar 7.96 1.25 12 12.87 1.29 5 3.15 4.87 0 0.00 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 18 16.14

GP Nipaniya 7.96 1.25 6 4.67 1.29 15 10.21 4.87 1 1.61 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 23 16.61

PS Sadar Chapra 45.85 7.22 5 18.43 7.45 0 0.00 28.06 5 6.41 1.47 0 0.00 1.65 0 0.00 0 0.00 10 24.84

GP Bhairopur

Nijamat 7.96 1.25 11 10.83 1.29 0 0.00 4.87 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00

0 0.00 11 10.83

GP Mouna 7.96 1.25 4 9.02 1.29 0 0.00 4.87 2 5.50 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 7 14.64

GP Chirand 7.96 1.25 5 4.33 1.29 0 0.00 4.87 3 10.97 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 9 15.41

GP Jalalpur 7.96 1.25 3 9.54 1.29 0 0.00 4.87 1 0.48 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 5 10.14

PS Mashrak 37.85 5.96 0 0.00 6.15 0 0.00 23.16 23 54.93 1.21 0 0.00 1.36 0 0.00 0 0.00 23 54.93

GP Karan kudariya 7.96 1.25 9 8.09 1.29 2 1.39 4.87 2 5.33 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 14.93

GP Sonauli 7.96 1.25 13 16.61 1.29 0 0.00 4.87 0 0.00 0.25 1 0.12 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 14 16.73

GP Mashrak West 7.96 1.25 9 6.36 1.29 1 0.76 4.87 3 9.21 0.25 0 0.00 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 13 16.33

Total 2301.42 362.46 2572 944.45 374 150 162.43 1408.31 622 1361.64 73.47 13 1.56 83.07 1 0.09 36 138.74 3388 2608.78

(Source: Scheme details of PRIs)


86

Appendix- 2.3

(Refer: Paragraph-2.1.3.4; Page-22)

Statement showing Work executed/found in Private premises

(Amount in `̀̀̀)

Name of Unit

Type of

Scheme

No. of

works Year

No. of

units

Estimate

cost

Expendit

ure Status Remarks

GP Birpur H.P. 2 2012-13 1 14500 12400 Complete

The hand pump was installed in private premises. The head

of the hand pump was not found. Hand pump was not in a

working condition

GP Birpur H.P. 2 2012-13 1 14500 12400 Complete

The hand pump was installed in private premises. The head

of the hand pump was not found. Hand pump was not in a

working condition

GP Khouna H.P. 6 2013-14 1 19500 16000 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises.


GP Khouna H.P. 3 2013-14 1 19500 16000 Complete

The hand pump was not in working condition. The hand

pump was installed in private premises.



GP Rampur H.P. 6 2014-15 1 29362 29362 Complete

The hand pump was installed in the private land of Sri

Dinesh Pal and was used privately

GP Rahui H.P. 10 2015-16 1 25000 24926 Complete

Hand pump was in working condition. Motor was found

installed in the hand pump

PS Rahui H.P. 11 2012-13 1 20000 20000 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises

GP Peshaur H.P. 16 2013-14 1 25000 24395 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises



GP Peshaur H.P. 5 2012-13 1 20000 20000 Complete

The Hand Pump was installed in private premises and was

not functioning since one year.



GP Peshaur H.P. 2 2013-14 1 25000 24395 Complete

The hand pump was installed in private premises and was

used purely for private purpose.

GP Supasang H.P. 5 2012-13 1 20000 20000 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises

GP Supasang H.P. 23 2012-13 1 25000 22000 Complete The hand pump was found installed in private premises.

GP Jagdishpur

Tiyari H.P. 3 2014-15 1 24500 24269 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises.

Appendix

87

GP Jagdishpur


GP Jagdishpur


GP Jagdishpur


GP Jagdishpur


GP Jagdishpur


PS Noorsarai H.P. 7 2013-14 1 24500 24320 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises.



GP Ranabigha H.P. 3 2013-14 1 24500 24377 Complete The hand pump was found in the private occupation of the

beneficiary

GP Dumrawan H.P. 13 2013-14 1 24500 23321 Complete The hand pump was installed in private premises

GP Aatanagar H.P. 1 2015-16 1 17300 15467 Complete Private water motor was found installed in the hand pump

GP Jalalpur H.P. 2 2015-16 1 34000 34000 Complete The hand pump was installed in the private premises and was

under private possession

GP Jalalpur H.P. 2 2015-16 1 34000 34000 Complete The hand pump was found installed in the house of Sri Tinku

Kumar Shah and was under private possession




under private possession. Private motor was found installed

in the hand pump

GP Jalalpur H.P. 1 2015-16 1 22000 21660 Complete The hand pump was installed in the private premise and was


GP Jalalpur H.P. 2 2015-16 1 34000 34000 Complete The hand pump was installed in the private premise and was

under private possession. Private motor was found installed

in the hand pump

Total 37 882662 847349 (Source : Joint Physical verification of schemes)


88

Appendix- 2.4


Statement showing Hand Pump and Solar Light were out of order (Amount in `)`)`)`)

Unit Type of

Scheme

No. of

works

Year No. of

units

Estimate

cost

Expenditure Status Remarks

GP Khouna solar light 1 2012-13 1 46500 46500 Complete The solar light was not in working condition

GP Naruar solar light 2 2012-13 1 48300 48300 Complete The solar light was not in working condition

GP Balba H.P. 1 2012-13 1 14010 14010 Complete Sand was coming with water of hand pump

GP Balba H.P. 2 2012-13 1 14010 14010 Complete The hand pump was broken and was not working

GP Karserua solar light 1 2013-14 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not in working condition

GP Karserua solar light 4 2013-14 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not in working condition

PS Sasaram

Sadar solar light 1 2013-14 1

27200 27200

Complete The solar light was not in working condition

GP Samahutta solar light 1 2012-13 1

27200 27200

Complete

The solar light was not in working condition. Solar Plate ,

Battery was not found at site

PS Rohtas H.P. 27 2013-14 1

22000 22000

Complete

The head of the hand pump was not found. Hand pump was not

in a working condition

GP Kochas solar light 2 2012-13 1

27200 27200

Complete

Solar light was not found installed at site. Pole, Battery and

Solar panel was found in the house Sri Tuntun Sah.


27200 27200

Complete

Solar light was not found installed at site. The pole was cut at

bottom.


27200

27200 Complete

Solar light was not found installed at site. Pole, Battery and

Solar panel was found in the house Sri Trahman Nai and was

used for private purpose.


27200

27200 Complete

Solar light was not working. Locals reported that the Battery

was taken by the Executive agent in 2014-15 but the same was

not brought back.


27200 27200

Complete

The solar light was not working. Only pole was found at site.

The Battery and solar plate was found in the house of Sri Shiv

Dayal Keshari and was used for private purpose.

GP Kochas solar light 3 2012-13 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not working. Only pole was found at site.

The battery was taken by the Executive agent for repairing. And

the Solar panel was kept in the house of Sri Sunil Sah

GP Bhaluhari solar light 3 2013-14 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not working

GP Bhaluhari solar light 8 2012-13 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not working.

GP Bhaisaha solar light 3 2013-14 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not working.

GP Bhaisaha solar light 1 2012-13 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not working.

Appendix

89

GP Rampur solar light 1 2012-13 1

27200 27200

Complete

The solar light was not working since 2015-16. The Battery was

found kept in private house of Sri Bhagwan Paswan

GP Rampur solar light 1 2012-13 1

27200 27200

Complete

The solar light was not working. The locals reported that the

solar light was not working after four months of installation in

2012-13. The Battery was kept in a private house.

GP Rampur solar light 6 2012-13 1 27200 27200 Complete The solar light was not in working condition since 2014-15



GP Meghi

Nagma H.P. 8 2012-13 1

24500 24500

Complete The hand pump was not in working condition.

GP Meghi

Nagma H.P. 7 2012-13 1

24500 24320

Complete

The hand pump was not in working condition. The Head of hand

pump was not found at site.

GP Rahui H.P. 1 2013-14 1 25000 25000 Complete The hand Pump was not in working condition.

PS Rahui H.P. 36 2012-13 1

20000 20000

Complete

The hand pump was not found in working condition. Handle of

the hand pump was not found.

GP Supasang H.P. 21 2012-13 1

25000 25000

Complete

The hand pump was not found at site. The locals reported that

hand pump was installed at site but went underneath.

GP Rasalpur H.P. 7 2013-14 1 24500 22782 Complete The hand pump was not working since two years

GP Rasalpur H.P. 9 2012-13 1 24500 20000 Complete The hand pump was not working since eight to nine months

GP Sarbahadi H.P. 1 2013-14 1 24500 24165 Complete The hand pump was not in working condition.

GP Dumrawan H.P. 3 2014-15 1 24500 23321 Complete The hand pump was not in working condition



GP Nipaniya Solar Light 8 2013-14 1

31450 31450

Complete

The solar light was not in working condition. Battery was not

found

GP Nipaniya Solar Light 6 2013-14 1 31450 31450 Complete Solar light was not working

GP Aatanagar Solar Light 2 2012-13 1 31450 31450 Complete Solar light was not working

GP Chirand H.P. 4 2013-14 1 33000 33300 Complete The hand pump was not working since 2015

Total 39 1054970 1046119

(Source : Joint Physical verification of schemes)


90

Appendix – 2.5

(Refer: Paragraph-2.1.3.5; Page –23)

Statement showing expenditure incurred out of untied grant (Amount in`)`)`)`)

District Name of the Unit Grant Admissible

item Scheme

Office

Expenditure Total Unspent

Percent expenditure on

Percent

unspent Admissible

item Scheme

Office

Expenditure

Madhubani

ZP Madhubani 4500000 1867312 127500 711909 2706721 1793279 41.50 2.83 15.82 39.85

PS Madhwapur 300000 0 30255 0 30255 269745 0 10.09 0 89.92

GP Basuki Bihar

North 600000 0 596000 0 596000 4000 0 99.33 0 0.60

GP Balba 600000 0 580000 10000 590000 10000 0 96.67 1.67 1.67

GP Sahar south 600000 0 333000 0 333000 267000 0 55.5 0 44.5

PS Jhanjharpur 300000 0 295233 0 295233 4767 0 98.41 0 1.59

GP Naruar 600000 0 363100 0 363100 236900 0 60.52 0 39.48

GP Sukhait 600000 0 534300 0 534300 65700 0 89.05 0 10.95

GP Sangram 600000 0 600000 0 600000 0 0 100.00 0 0

PS Basopatti 300000 0 0 201443 201443 98557 0 0 67.15 32.85

GP Khauna 600000 0 500000 0 500000 100000 0 83.33 0 16.67

GP Hathapur Parsa 600000 0 589500 0 589500 10500 0 98.25 0 1.75

GP Birpur 600000 0 544200 0 544200 55800 0 90.70 0 9.30

PS Laukahi 300000 0 0 202640 202640 97360 0 0 67.55 32.45

GP Bangama south 600000 0 316000 0 316000 284000 0 52.67 0 47.33

GP Kukurdaura 600000 0 517500 7500 525000 75000 0 86.25 1.25 12.50

GP Belhi

Bhawanipur 600000 0 465500 123500 589000 11000 0 77.58 20.58 1.83

GP Narendra pur 600000 0 548000 15000 563000 37000 0 91.33 2.50 6.167

Nalanda

ZP Nalanda 4500000 23100 0 164325 187425 4312575 0.51 0 3.65 95.84

PS Biharsharif 300000 73000 0 73000 227000 0 24.33 0 75.67

GP Sarbahadi 600000 325000 125000 0 450000 150000 54.17 20.83 0 25.00

GP Meghi Nagwan 600000 136150 108057 163850 408057 191943 22.69 18.01 27.30 31.99

GP Dumrawan 600000 44990 418654 109056 572700 27300 7.49 69.78 18.18 4.55

GP Ranabigha 600000 396000 186000 0 582000 18000 66.00 31.00 0 3.00

PS Rahui 300000 69801 0 64162 133963 166037 23.27 0 21.39 55.35

GP Rahui 600000 200400 374600 25000 600000 0 33.4 62.43 4.17 0

GP Supasang 600000 57500 300000 199000 556500 43500 9.58 50 33.17 7.25

GP Peshaur 600000 0 145000 399000 544000 56000 0 24.17 66.5 9.33

PS Harnaut 300000 0 0 195700 195700 104300 0 0 65.23 34.77

GP Kolawan 600000 321000 279000 0 600000 0 53.5 46.5 0 0

GP Telmar 600000 0 600000 0 600000 0 0 100 0 0

GP Poari Paschim 600000 0 148500 289500 438000 162000 0 24.75 48.25 27.00

PS Noorsarai 300000 0 0 0 0 300000 0 0 0 100.00

GP Jagdishpur Tiyari 600000 53874 421500 123896 599270 730 8.979 70.25 20.65 0.12

Appendix

91

(Source : Records of the audited units)

GP Rasalpur 600000 52217 337000 144783 534000 66000 8.70 56.17 24.13 11.00

GP Nirpur 600000 0 540681 54500 595181 4819 0 90.11 9.08 0.80

Rohtas

ZP Rohtas 4500000 1756727 0 719148 2475875 2024125 39.04 0 15.98 44.98

PS Kochas 300000 0 265000 0 265000 35000 0 88.33 0 11.67

GP Laheri 600000 197500 375500 0 573000 27000 32.92 62.58 0 4.5

GP Kochas 600000 200000 0 0 200000 400000 33.33 0 0 66.67

PS Dehri 300000 200000 0 0 200000 100000 66.67 0 0 33.33

GP Bahluari 600000 90000 423395 50100 563495 36505 15 70.57 8.35 6.08

GP Bahisaha 600000 90000 251000 50000 391000 209000 15 41.83 8.33 34.83

GP Majhiaon 600000 155000 79987 90013 325000 275000 25.83 13.33 15.00 45.83

PS Rohtas 300000 0 201800 0 201800 98200 0 67.27 0 32.73

GP Akabarpur 600000 0 529000 0 529000 71000 0 88.17 0 11.83

GP Samahutta 600000 90000 502000 0 592000 8000 15 83.67 0 1.33

PS Sasaram 300000 0 238102 0 238102 61898 0 79.37 0 20.63

GP Karserua 600000 200000 378000 0 578000 22000 33.33 63 0 3.67

GP Darigaon 600000 200000 289000 0 489000 111000 33.33 48.17 0 18.5

GP Muradabad kala 600000 199500 393700 0 593200 6800 33.25 65.67 0 1.133

GP Rampur 600000 200000 381000 0 581000 19000 33.33 63.5 0 3.167

Saran ZP Saran 4500000 1804825 94884 896475 2796184 1703816 40.11 2.11 19.92 37.86

PS Panapur 300000 100000 200000 0 300000 0 33.33 66.67 0 0

GP Totaha Jagatpur 600000 0 561000 39000 600000 0 0 93.5 6.5 0

GP Bankwa 600000 0 490000 15000 505000 95000 0 81.67 2.5 15.83

PS Isuapur 300000 0 38735 261265 300000 0 0 12.97 87.09 0

GP Agauthar Sunder 600000 200000 304000 0 504000 96000 33.33 50.67 0 16

GP Aata Nagar 600000 200000 203000 0 403000 197000 33.33 33.84 0 32.83

GP Nipaniya 600000 200000 400000 0 600000 0 33.33 66.67 0 0

PS Sadar Chapra 300000 0 0 0 0 300000 0 0 0 100.00

GP Bhairopur

Nijamat 600000 297300 254700 0 552000 48000 49.55 42.45 0 8

GP Mouna 600000 213500 325000 0 538500 61500 35.58 54.17 0 10.25

GP Chirand 600000 0 593000 0 593000 7000 0 98.83 0 1.17

GP Jalalpur 600000 0 580000 0 580000 20000 0 96.67 0 3.33

PS Mashrak 300000 0 0 0 0 300000 0 0 0 100.00

GP Karan kudariya 600000 124000 476000 0 600000 0 20.67 79.33 0 0

GP Sonauli 600000 200000 389500 0 589500 10500 33.33 64.97 0 1.75

GP Mashrak West 600000 124000 470500 0 594500 5500 20.67 78.47 0 0.97

Total 52200000 10589696 20684883 5325765 36600344 15599656


92

Appendix-2.6

(Refer: Paragraph –2.1.3.10; Page –27) Statement showing difference in Cash Book and Bank Account Closing Balance as on 31 March 2016

(Amount in `̀̀̀)

District Unit Cash book

Balance

Bank

Balance

Difference Bank account no.

Madhubani

GP Naruar 225976 236906 10930 BOI 468610210000012

PS Basopatti 321865 819386 497521 UBGB 1004061030004818

PS Laukahi 147848 282507 134659 UBGB 1003781030001886

Nalanda

GP Meghi Nagwan 191943 206002 14059 MBGB 71520100078339

GPRanabigha 17472 25117 7645 MBGB 71520100080194

PS Rahui 555283 582923 27640 MBGB 74310100006200

GP Supasang 46131 17525 -28606 MBGB 74310100008518

PS Harnaut 533641 783514 249873 SBI 32329267921

GP Kolawan 3665 3647 -18 PNB 6747000100022186

GP Telmar 0 5184 5184 PNB 6747000100022195

PS Noorsarai 731431 814007 82576 PNB 0814000101189520

GP Jagdishpur Tiyari 713 2105691 2104978 MBGB 71790100082658,

PNB 1255000105114782

Rohtas PS Kochas 35764 241606 205842 PNB 0846000105032627

PS Rohtas 98393 98212 -181 PNB 1308000100119444

Saran

PS Panapur 63462 65152 1690 UBGB 1005761030001794

GP Bankwa 102196 95327 -6869 UBGB 1006091030006997

GP Agauthar Sunder 96602 97102 500 UBGB 1006131030001107

GP Aata Nagar 197233 207233 10000 UBGB 1006131030000971

GP Bhairopur

Nijamat

48865 131751 82886 UBI 415202010006611

GP Mouna 61192 292844 231652 SBI 30283704034

GP Jalalpur 20064 162198 142134 UBI 099558488143

PS Mashrak -83579 6171 89750 CBI 3187082172

GP Karan kudariya 1815 2587 772 UBGB 1005681030008663

GP Mashrak West 5750 353 -5397 CBI 3187410161

Total 3423725 7282945 3859220 (Source: Cash Book of the Sampled PRIs)

Appendix

93

Appendix –2.7

(Refer: Paragraph-2.1.4.1; Page –27)

Statement showing details of schemes executed in contravention of the guidelines

(` ` ` ` in lakh)))) Sanction

order/Date

Name of the

unit

Block Name of the Scheme Expenditure

369/29-09-12

ZP

Madhubani

Khajauli Construction of library near temple at village Makunma in

Chandradih Panchayat

3.37

370/29-09-12 Rahika Construction of Shed for Cemetery in Gram Panchayat

Shambhuaar near north bhinda to maurjipokhar at village samoul

2.43

370/29-09-12 Jhanjharpur Construction of shed for Cemetrey in Simra 2.43

369/29-09-12 Laukhi Construction of Libarary building in village Kachua under GP

Bujhaar in block Laukahi

2.37

400/12-11-12 Rahika Constuction of I.T. building in the premises of Zila Parishad

Madhubani

15.00

475/16-01-13 Rahika Constuction of Auditorium building in the premises of Zila

Parishad Madhubani

30.00

538/16-03-13 Jaynagar Construction of PCC road from house of Shamim dealer to the tea

shop of Analarul in GP Dewdha middle.

3.24

538/16-03-13 Benipatti Construction of Cemetery Shed in Village Dhanauja 2.87

85/08-06-13 Jhanjharpur Construction of Libararybuiling in village Biyara 2.55

85/08-06-13 Khagauli Construction of Libarary building in ward no. 05 at

MaharajpurChattatol in GP Chandradih

2.55

86/08-06-13 Benipatti Construction of Cemetery shed near MahadevMandir at village

Durgauli in GP Manpaur

2.14

86/08-06-13 Babubarhi Construction of Cemetrey Shed near Eedgah in village Hanuman

Nagar

3.05

37/26-05-14 Rahika Repairing work of Chairman chamber Zila Parishad Madhubani 3.00

37/26-05-14 Rahika Repairing work of DDC Madhubani residential office 1.85

47/04-06-14 Pandaul Construction of Bathing Ghat in BaliyaDih Pond 3.20

48/04-06-14 Babubarhi Construction of Community Hall in Dumrahi 4.00

48/04-06-14 Babubarhi Costruction of Library building of Mahatma Gandhi Memorial

College in Ambedkar Nagar, Sahar Ghat

4.00

49/04-06-14 Bisfi Construction of Platform near BramhSthan at Singhiya East 1.24

49/04-06-14 Jhanjharpur Construction of PCC form house of Shiv Kumar to house of

Kapileshwar Mandal in Village Kako

3.49

49/04-06-14 Lakhnaur Construction of PCC from house of Ashok thakur to Ram Chowk 3.93

49/04-06-14 Rahika Constrction of PCC from Rahika High School to Temple 3.93

49/04-06-14 Andhrathadi Construction of PCC in the road towards BhagwatiSthan in

PrasnGord.

3.46

49/04-06-14 Jaynagar Construction of Platform in Vairahi play ground 1.23

49/04-06-14 Bisfi Construction of platform near Vanmikha in the road from

Salempur to Sisai

1.24

49/04-06-14 Khutona Construction of platform at Santnagar in GP Birpur 1.23

49/04-06-14 Andhrathadi Construction of PCC from house of Mahadalit Ram Prasad to the

house of Rajendra Ram in GP Thari South

3.97

49/04-06-14 Rahika Construction of PCC in the road from SugaunaHunda to house of

Nawijaan in GP Vasauli

1.30

49/04-06-14 Ladaniyaa Construction of Platform in Middle school Parsadih 1.23

49/04-06-14 Madhwapur Repairing of road from house of Asheshar yadav to Utkramit

High School Chimuhan in GP Vishunpur

1.38

50/04-06-14 Harlakhi Repairing of road from Samudayik Dalan to house of Mansur

Alam village Sothgaon

3.00

50/04-06-14 Pandaul Construction of road approaching towards Sariswpadi Tara

Mandir

2.55

120/20-06-14 Jaynagar Construction of PCC from house of Prahalad Purwe to house of

Lal Babu in GP Rampatti

2.81

388/10-01-15 Khutona Construction of Community Hall on Zila Parishad land at Parsari

Nahar Chowk

3.00


94

404/23-01-15 Rahika Construction of PCC in village Bhawanipur in GP Spta Gram

from house of Sri Chandan Das to house of Md. Dakwa

2.39

22/25-02-16 Jhanjharpur Earth filling, brick soling and PCC work in Village Kothiya from

house of Niraj Mandal to house of Bechan Mandal

5.00

4/13-14 ZP Rohtas --- Construction of PCC road from house of Janardan Singh to

Temple (Shankar) in village Parasdih 4.30

Total 138.73 (Source : Records of the test checked ZPs)

Appendix

95

Appendix – 2.8

(Refer: Paragraph –2.1.4.2; Page-29)

Statement showing unauthorised occupation of ZP IBs/Lands as on 31.03.2016

(Amount in `)`)`)`)

District Name of the

Inspection

Bungalow (IB)

/Building

Name of the

Occupants

Rent paid Remarks

Madhubani

IB Sakri Police station No rent was being paid.

IB Benipatti DSP, Benipatti No rent was being paid.

IB Umgaon Sudha Parlour No rent was being paid.

Assistant Engineer

Office, Jhanjarpur Bus Stand

No rent was being paid.

IB Madhubani DM, Madhubani 250 per month Being used as the

residence

Rohtas

IB, Bikramganj Sub Divisional

Officer 68 per day

4 rooms were occupied

@ ` 17 per day per

room since 2005-06.

IB, Kochas Block and Circle

Office, Kochas 64 per day

Rent paid @ ` 64 per

day for the last 24 years. (Source: Information furnished by the ZPs)


96

Appendix – 2.9

(Refer: Paragraph - 2.1.4.2; Page-29)

Statement Showing Outstanding Rents (Amount in `)

District Locality of the Shop No. of

Shops

Last date of

Rent revision

Outstandi

ng

Amount

Outstan

ding in

Months

Remarks

Madhub

ani

Parishad Bazar, Khajauli 78 January'2011 360240 01 to 99

Parishad Bazar, Rampatti 10 January'2011 40320 02 to 24

Parishad Bazar, Sakri 23 January'2011 277560 01 to 163

Parishad Bazar, Madhwapur 20 January'2011 106080 02 t0 35 February'16

Parishad Bazar, Loha 20 January'2011 198080 3 to 69 February'16

Parishad Bazar, Saharghat 7 January'2011 53160 2 to 47 February'16

Ashok Bazar, Jai Nagar 40 January'2011 324290 2 to 93 February'16

Nidhi Bazar, Jai Nagar 28 January'2011 118592 2 to 52 February'16

Parishad Bazar, Jai Nagar (part-I) 10 January'2011 311760 2 to 52 February'16

Parishad Bazar, Jai Nagar (part-II) 10 January'2011 107660 6 to 97 February'16

Shops located at Laukahi 24 January'2011 330280 13 to 48

Shops located at Phulparas 25 January'2011 351200 09 to 44

Kiosk located in ZP campus 10 January'2011 62750 02 to 51

Shops constructed at Parishad bazar,

Madhubani 23

January'2011

637140 02 to 48

Lodging house at first floor, Parishad

bazar, Madhubani 13

January'2011

78750 15

shops located infront of Parishad

bazar gate 1

January'2011

18900 15

Shops constructed at 2nd floor of

Parishad bazar, Madhubani 7

January'2011

325375 09 to 38

349 Jan'2011 3702137 01 to 163

Saran

East to ZP 31

December'1991

to September'06 147901 1 to 114

North to ZP 59

December'88 to

Septtember'11 256147 3 to 103

Near L.F 20 March-93 120564 2 to 99

Dak Bungalow, Mashrak 10 May-88 81349 6 to 173

Near J.E. Residence, Ekma 12

December'87 to

April'88 88290 3 to 228

Shop near Dak Bungalow, Baniapur 19

November'94 to

January'98 165830 3 to 186

Near east to IB, Mashrak 17 March'97 130202 NA June 2016

South to Veterinary Hospital,

Mashrak 10 March'97 16344 31 to 48

Near Dak Bungalow, Chhapara 26

June'95 to

April'05 263634 NA June 2016

Near Godown, Sonepur 9

January'94 to

December'01 42250 9 to 76

New Shops at Dighwara 89 November'1996 946016 3 to 242

Shops at Khaira 95 June'99 1218650 NA

Fron east to L.F Bunglow 21 June-10 112048 5 to 70

North to L.F Bunglow 5 January'2006 47520 3 to 102

Old Shop at Dighwara 29 September'1992 124922 NA

Appendix

97

Near J.E. Residence, Persa 13 December'2001 106278 NA

Near IB, Ekma 10 September'1993 245197 NA

475

December'87 -

September'11 4113142 1 to 242

Nalanda

Bharawpur Group-A 13

September'2000

to February'02 26712 1 to 09

Bharawpur Group-B 14

June'01 to

July'02 49644 1 to 13

Bharawpur Group-C 13

August'99 to

March'02 28346 1 to 16

Bharawpur Group-D & E 20

September'97 to

April'04 32588 1 to 17

Bharawpur 15

November'98 to

May'03 49491 1 to 84

Bharawpur (Lower Storey) 19

April'98 to

December'98 162694 1 to 152

Bharawpur (Upper Storey) 16

April'01 to

May'07 24700 1 to 17

BharawpurAsthawan Road 5 July-98 4807 1 to 9

Mamta Restaurant 1 November'01 8525 11

North to Bharawpur 1 March'02 1344 1

Bharawpur Bank Bhawan 1 February'01 13440 12

4 Gumti at North to Bharawpur 4

June'06 to

August'06 3000 4 to 11

South to Bharawpur Temple 14

October'02 to

February'03 16302 2 to 18

East to Bharawpur Group A 3

January'2000 to

October'03 8300 3 to 77

Gumti at Bharawpur 3 January'02 1500 5

Kona Sarai 23

September'96 to

May'99 90540 1 to 19

Pili Kothi 42

August'99 to

May'99 61618 1 to 33

Town Hall 6

April98 to

August'98 4110 3 to 7

Bihar Sharif IB Premises 19 August'03 19700 1 to 23

Mughal Kuan 11 April-98 6125 2 to 7

MughaKuan 2 May'02 2000 1 to 33

Khasganj 26

September'98 to

June'03 11750 1 to 26

Giriyak More at Rajgir 60

February'03 to

October'08 106060 1 to 123

Gumti at RajgirGiriyak More 8 September'07 5000 4 to 12

Asthawan 31 June'01 8750 1 to 11

Deshna Path at Ashtawan IB 10

September'07 to

March'08 3500 3 to 7

Parwalpur Middle School 13 June'04 9500 1 to 152

ParwalpurMaweshiPahatak 9 May'02 8850 1 to 3

Ekangarsarai IB 16

July'2000 to

October'03 10600 1 to 4

Islampur 24

November'97 to

September'04 56595 1 to 20

IslampurPhatak 5 December'2000 15000 2 to 10

Noorsarai 14

August'03 to

March'10 16800 1 to 123

Chandi IB, Group-A 8 February'05 10950 1 to 17


98

Chandi IB, Group-D 8 March'09 113250 15 to 85

Silao Bypass 16 August'02 180900 3 to 141 July 2016

Nalanda More 7

October'06 to

October'07 8350 6 to 32

Godown at Kona Sarai 1 NA 0 0

501

September'96

to March'10 1181341 1 to 152

Grand Total 1325

December'87 -

September'11 8996620 1 to 242 (Source: Information furnished by the ZPs)

Appendix

99

Appendix – 2.10

(Refer: Paragraph -2.1.4.2; Page-30) Statement Showing Outstanding Rents by Government Offices as on 31 March 2016

(Amount in `̀̀̀)

District Name of the

Building

To whom issued Monthly rent

(`)

Period of outstanding

rent

No. of

months

Outstanding

rent

Nalanda

IB, Biharsharif District Education

Officer, Nalanda

30000 January'16 to March'16 3 90000

Meeting Hall

(Upper storey)

District Programme

Officer, Nalanda

6000 October'15 to March'16 6 36000

2000

(Electricity)

March'15 47631

Meeting Hall

(Upper storey)

Director, Bal Shram

Pariyojana Samiti,

Nalanda

2000 December'15 to

March'16

4 8000

Kisan Bhawan,

Chandi,

Nalanda

College of

Engineering, Chandi

6000 March'15 to March'16 13 78000

Dak Bungalow,

Rajgir

Principal Sainik

School, Rajgir

14927 July'15 to January'16 7 104489

Upper Storey

of the Dr. Lal

Singh Tyagi

Building

Executive Engineer

(EE), Jalpath Division,

Ekangarsarai, Nalanda

5500 April'15 to March'16 12 66000

Press Bhawan

(Upper Storey)

Settlement Officer,

Nalanda

10300 June'15 to March'16 10 103000

Press Bhawan

(Upper Storey)

EE , R.G.N.P, LAEO 500 February'1989 to

July'12

260 130000

100 (Electricity) 239200

Press Bhawan

(Upper Storey)

EE, LAEO

500 January'15 to March'16 15 9000

100 (Electricity)

Press Bhawan

(Upper Storey)

EE, DUDA, Nalanda

500 June'15 to March'16 10 5000

100 (Electricity)

Sub Total 916320

Rohtas

ZP Office E.E, REO works

Divison

1703 Since April 2015 18733

ZP Office E.E, NREP Rohtas NA Since 2007 219995

IB, Bikraganj SDO ` 68 per day (4

rooms @ ` 17

per room

NA NA 98560

IB, Chenari SP Rohtas ` 32 per day Occupied from

18.05.82 to 30.06.99

(4424 days)

NA 141568

IB, Kochas Block and Circle

Office, Kochas

` 64 per day NA NA 561664

IB, Tilothu Block and Circle

Office, Tilothu

Rent outstanding till

2010

NA 528964

Sub Total 1569484

Grand Total 2485804 (Source: Information furnished by the ZPs)


100

Appendix-2.11

(Refer: Paragraph-2.2, Page-32)

Statement showing deprivation of revenue of ` ` ` ` 3.78 crore

(Patna Zila Parishad)

Sl.

No.

Floor

No.

Super built up

Area (Sq. ft.)

Rate (`̀̀̀) (per sq. ft.

of super built area

per month) (no. of

months-60)

Deprivation of

Revenue (`̀̀̀)

01. 1 3347.62 25 5021430.00

02. 2 3347.62 24 4820572.80

03. 3 3347.62 24 4820572.80

04. 4 3347.62 23 4619715.60

05. 5 3512.99 23 4847926.20

06. 6 3512.99 22 4637146.80

07. 7 3512.99 22 4637146.80

08. 8 3512.99 21 4426367.40

Total 3,78,30,878.40

(Source: Records/Information furnished by the ZP Patna

Appendix

101

Appendix-3.1

(Refer: Paragraph- 3.4.2, Page- 38)

Statement showing list of functions to be carried out by ULBs

Sl.

No.

Section of

BMA 2007

Functions

1. 290 Urban Planning including Town Planning

2. 274A & 275 Regulation of land use and construction of buildings

3. 45 Planning for economic and social development

4. 45 Roads and bridges

5. 45 & 169-192 Water supply for domestic, industrial and commercial purposes

6. 45; 193-203 &

220-230

Public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management

7. 45; 250-261 &

262-268

Urban forestry, protection of the environment and promotion of ecological aspects

8. 287 Safeguarding the interests of weaker sections of society, including the

handicapped and mentally retarded

9. 287&289 Slum improvement and up-gradation

10. 287 Urban Poverty Alleviation

11. Chapter XXXII Provision of urban amenities and facilities such as parks, gardens, playgrounds

12. 45 Promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects

13. 269-272 & 421 Burials and burial grounds; cremations, cremation grounds and electric

crematoriums

14 249 & 421 Cattle pounds; prevention of cruelty to animals

15 352-353 Vital statistics including registration of births and deaths

16 45 Public amenities including street lighting, parking lots, bus stops and public

conveniences

17 245 & 421 Regulation of slaughter houses and tanneries

(Source:Information provided by UD&HD,GoB)


102

Appendix-3.2

(Refer: Paragraph- 3.8.4, Page-45)

Statement showing Target and Present Status of SLBs in Nagar Nigams

Indicator

Target

Benchm

ark

Ara Begusarai

Bhagalpur

Bihar

Sharif

Darbhanga

Gaya

Katihar

Munger

Muzaffarpur

Purnia

Patna

Range

WATER SUPPLY

Coverage of water supply

connections

100% 22% 10% 50% 50% 20% 40% 0% 70% 60% 0% 20% 0-70 %

Extent of metering 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 15% 0% 0% 0% 0-15 %

Continuity of water supplied 24 hrs 5-8 hrs. 6hrs. 6 hrs 6hrs. 0 hrs 24 hrs 0 hrs 12hrs. 12 hrs 0 hrs 24 hrs. 0-24 hrs.

Efficiency in collection of

water use charges

90% 0% 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0-20 %

Efficiency in redressal of

customer Complaints

80% 40% 50% 90% 20% 60% 50% 0% 60% 50% 0% 50% 0-90 %

SEWERAGE

Coverage of Toilets 100% 0% 0% 90% 60% 10% 60% 0% 0% 0% 5% 70% 0-90%

Coverage of sewerage

Network

100% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 65% 0-65 %


customer Complaints

80% 0% 50% 70% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 70% 0-70 %

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Household Level Coverage 100% 60% 20% 95% 80% 90% 50% 9 wards 40% 0% 10% 50% 0-95 %

Efficiency in collection of

solid waste

100% 60% 20% 100% 80% 90% 80% 0% 40% 0% 10% 50% 0-100 %

Extent of segregation of

Municipal Solid Waste

(MSW)

100% 0% 20% 20% 0% % 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 50% 0-50 %

Extent of Scientific Disposal

of MSW

100% 5% 20% 0% 0% 0% 60% 0% 0% 0% 10% 20% 0-60 %


customer Complaints

80% 20% 50% 85% 60% 40% 70% 0% 0% 0% 0% 70% 0-85 %

(Source: Budget of Municipal Corporations)

Appendix

103

Appendix-3.3


Statement showing Receipt and Utilisation of 28 ULBs Sl.

No. Name of

ULB

FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 Opening

Balance

Receipt Expenditure Opening

Balance *


Balance


Balance

Receipt Expenditure

1 Patna 64.44 64.43 44.27 84.61 116.52 72.35 128.78 146.84 121.82 192.98 265.14 213.57 2 Danapur 5.59 5.91 4.63 6.87 4.64 2.53 8.98 27.14 10.33 25.79 19.97 11.59 3 Khagaul 0.94 2.80 2.60 1.14 2.99 1.69 2.44 4.79 4.63 2.61 6.97 3.51 4 Phulwarisharif 2.42 4.72 2.57 4.57 6.62 3.39 7.79 5.15 1.85 11.10 11.44 7.58 5 Arrah 10.68 16.24 10.61 16.30 23.80 8.65 31.45 14.07 27.74 17.79 10.46 15.70 6 Begusarai 4.48 3.10 0.99 6.59 1.44 0.45 7.58 4.73 3.50 8.81 9.33 14.87 7 Chhapra 10.37 10.80 7.49 13.68 3.70 7.38 10.00 24.47 10.55 23.92 7.52 19.89 8 Biharsharif 14.31 14.31 11.17 17.45 23.27 17.00 23.73 21.73 19.28 26.18 27.94 25.64 9 Siwan 8.68 8.36 4.49 12.55 8.69 8.64 12.61 12.99 11.77 13.83 9.80 14.05 10 Hajipur 0.74 7.19 3.17 4.76 5.54 5.10 5.19 32.58 14.39 23.39 5.67 2.16 11 Bhagalpur 16.56 12.57 10.33 18.80 16.81 11.66 23.95 30.22 21.80 32.37 29.87 46.62 12 Jamalpur 2.97 15.67 7.83 10.81 11.05 15.39 6.47 4.20 4.77 5.89 11.08 5.20 13 Munger 15.10 16.85 20.59 11.36 32.94 11.27 33.03 43.24 38.87 37.41 8.73 25.12 14 Gaya 20.85 21.33 10.01 32.16 22.25 22.05 32.36 48.08 28.76 51.69 56.90 41.60 15 Aurangabad 3.37 5.34 2.93 5.77 8.69 4.54 9.93 10.52 1.04 19.40 9.05 11.06 16 Bodh Gaya 2.98 1.79 1.53 3.24 4.39 2.21 5.42 6.07 1.54 9.95 10.88 7.50 17 Nawada 5.79 4.37 3.07 7.09 11.84 11.47 7.46 14.23 4.44 17.25 25.28 15.72 18 Sasaram 9.50 7.28 5.73 11.04 18.52 15.26 14.30 14.57 10.89 17.97 3.36 3.67 19 Dehri 5.66 5.53 4.05 7.13 11.91 9.06 9.98 14.89 4.85 20.02 5.81 4.49 20 Kishanganj 13.54 10.80 4.57 19.77 16.97 7.12 29.62 30.90 34.70 25.81 NA NA 21 Katihar 19.57 5.35 5.84 19.08 22.34 10.01 31.41 14.67 16.12 29.96 NA NA 22 Purnea NA NA NA NA NA NA 56.98 40.09 47.11 49.96 NA NA 23 Saharsa NA NA NA NA NA NA 16.09 23.16 25.86 13.39 NA NA 24 Muzaffarpur 34.09 17.91 12.29 39.71 13.54 12.12 41.13 49.20 31.40 58.93 36.28 33.83 25 Darbhanga 21.95 13.26 6.76 28.45 14.78 11.50 31.73 42.85 25.36 49.21 54.62 27.50 26 Motihari 7.68 10.01 5.95 11.74 14.70 3.50 22.94 18.12 17.57 23.49 8.50 11.17 27 Bettiah 13.84 8.84 6.89 15.79 8.35 6.32 17.82 22.70 28.26 12.26 13.31 4.95 28 Sitamarhi 14.88 6.03 1.30 19.62 18.04 15.94 12.72 12.97 20.20 14.48 19.42 7.32

Total 330.98 300.79 201.66 430.08 444.33 296.60 641.89 735.17 589.40 835.84 667.33 574.31

Source: Information provided by the UD&HD)

NA= Not Available , * OB not tallied with CB of previous years


104

Appendix-3.4

(Refer: Paragraph-3.9.3; Page-48)

Statement showing important recommendations of Fifth SFC in respect of ULBs & its

acceptance by the State Government

Sl.

No.

Para No.

of

Fifth SFC

Report

Recommendation Status of acceptance by the State

Government

1. 8.9.6 Devolution of State Own Tax Revenue (SOTR) to

Local Bodies, 8.5 per cent in 2015-16 and 9 per cent

for 2016-17 to 2019-20.

The Government accepted the devolution

to Local Bodies at the rate of 8.5 per cent

out of SOTR for the period 2015-20.

2. 8.9.8 The total Fund (Devolution + Grant) transferred to

the LBs starting with 2.75 per cent in 2015-16, 3 per

cent in 2016-18 and 3.25 per cent in 2018-20 out of

State Budget.

The Government accepted Fund

(Devolution + Grant) transferred to Local

Bodies at a uniform rate of 2.75 per cent

of total expenditure (actuals) of previous

financial year for 2015-20.

3. 8.10.4 Distribution of Devolved funds and Grants between

PRIs and ULBs would be in the ratio of 70:30 in

2015-16 and 60:40 in subsequent 4 years.

The Government accepted the distribution

at a uniform ratio of 70:30 between PRIs

and ULBs for 2015-20.

4. 9.5.8 Devolved funds would be given to the Local Bodies

(LBs) as “Block Fund” and used by the LBs for the

purposes given in their priority.

Accepted

5. 9.12 The 2nd

installment of the Fifth SFC Grants would

be released on submission of utilization of 50 per

cent of the 1st installment, which are at least

internally audited.

The Government accepted that before

release of second installment of amount

to be transferred to Local bodies,

submission of accounts of the expenditure

of the previous financial year and its

Internal audit report along with utilization

certificate would be mandatory.

6. 9.13.1 Salaries of at least the existing staffs of the ULBs

and the ZPs must come from their own revenues.

State Government could at best meet the arrears.

State Government accepted the

recommendation with minor modification

and allowed monthly salary and

pensionary payment from Devolution +

Grant under Fifth SFC.

7. 9.13.2 Funds earmarked for Manpower is only for sanction

of new and filling of the vacant positions as per the

Model Panchayat and Municipal Cadres and not for

payment of salary etc. to the existing staff.

Accepted

8. 9.6.3 Grants would be utilised for (a) Manpower,

Training, e-Governance, Office Space (b) GK (c)

Preparation of Master Plans/CDPs/DPRs/GIS Maps

(d) Developing Divisional and Headquarters on the

lines of Smart and AMRUT Cities (e) SPUR Type

Professional Services to the ULBs and the PRIs (f)

Promoting PPP (g) Incentive for ARM and

Performance Grants (h) Regulatory Bodies

including Ombudsman, State Property Tax Board,

Real Estate Regulatory & Development Authority

and Urban Regulator, and DLFA & internal audit.

Accepted

9. 9.13.3 Funds for e-Governance must be used for

operationalizing e-Panchayat and e- Municipality

modules in a Mission Mode.

Accepted

Appendix

105

10. 9.6.5 Matching Grant for Additional Resource

Mobilization (ARM) would be given in the ratio of

1:1 for Municipal Corporations, 1:2 for Nagar

Parishads, 1:3 for Nagar Panchayats under the

ULBs.

Accepted

11. 9.6.5 Amount of overall performance grant for the ULBs

would supplement ‘Mukhyamantri Panchayat

Protsahan Yojana’ and be divided among Municipal

Corporations, Nagar Parishads and Nagar

Panchayats in the ratio of 1:2:3.

Accepted

12. 9.11 Resource gap of the LBs remaining even after the

Fifth SFC transfers would be bridged through (a)

own additional revenue (tax and non-tax), (b) full

utilization of Central and State schemes, (c)

leveraging PPP, (d) borrowing, and (e) sound

expenditure management.

Accepted

(Source: Fifth SFC Report)


106

Appendix-3.5

(Refer: Paragraph- 3.9.5, Page-49)

Financial Statement not prepared

Sl.

No

Unit Period

1. Nagar Parishad Nawada 2014-15 to 2015-16

2. Nagar Parishad Saharsa 2013-14 to 2015-16

3. Nagar Parishad Dumraon 2014-15 to 2015-16

4. Nagar Parishad Mokama 2014-15 to 2015-16

5. Nagar Panchayat Naugachhiya 2013-14 to 2015-16

6. Nagar Panchayat Barbeegha 2013-14 to 2015-16

7. Nagar Panchayat Bikram 2015-16

8. Nagar Panchayat Bikramganj 2012-13 to 2015-16

9. Nagar Panchayat Makdhumpur 2012-13 to 2015-16

10. Nagar Panchayat Nokha 2013-14 to 2015-16

11. Nagar Panchayat Amarpur 2013-14 to 2015-16

12. Nagar Panchayat Kanti 2013-14 to 2015-16

13. Nagar Panchayat Kataiya 2013-14 to 2015-16

(Source: Information provided by audited units)

Appendix

107

Appendix-4.1

(Refer: Paragraph-4.1.7.1, Page- 56)

Statement regarding transfer of grants to Parallel Bodies

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

Name of

Nagar

Nigam

Allotment No. /

Date

Amount

of

allotment

Name of the

Agency to

whom amount

transferred

Amount

transferred

For construction/ repair/

beautification of

Bhagalpur 78/19.11.2014 3.96 BUIDCO 3.96 Bus Stand

Biharsharif

107/28.02.2014 2.00 BUIDCO 2.00 Bus Stand

78/19.11.2014 1.50 BUIDCO 1.50

135/14.02.2015 0.10 DUDA, 0.10 Samrat Ashok Bhawan

Gaya 110/28.02.2014 2.00 BUIDCO 2.00 Bus Stand

78/19.11.2014 2.22 BUIDCO 2.21

Patna

117/14.3.2013 4.56 BUIDCO 4.55 Bus Stand

14/17.5.2013 0.80 BRJP 0.80 Crematorium

34/08.08.2014 2.49 BUIDCO 2.48 Adalatganj pond

90/5.12.2014 1.20 DUDA 1.20 Begampur community Hall

90/5.12.2014 0.80 DUDA 0.80 Park at kautilya nagar, BMP

campus, Vayas Nagar

48/27.08.2014 0.93 BSHB 0.92 Park at Hanuman Nagar MIG

67/22.10.2014 0.43 BSHB 0.43 Park at Lohiyanagar MIG 100

105/29.12.2014 0.04 BUIDCO 0.04 Park at Police colony

64/20.10.2014 7.50 BUIDCO 7.50 Bus Queue Shelters

45/20.8.2015 26.07 BUIDCO 26.07 Traffic light system

109/28.02.2014 2.00 BUIDCO 3.97 Maintenance of Mourya Lok

110/28.02.2014 2.00 BUIDCO

112/28.2.2014 1.95 BUIDCO 1.18 Paver block in Maurya Lok

10/5.6.2014 3.02 BRJP 3.02 Crematorium

32/20.8.2014 0.02 DUDA 0.02 community hall at Begampur

32/20.8.2014 0.09 DUDA 0.09 Park at Kautilya Nagar

32/20.8.2014 0.06 DUDA 0.06 Park at BMP campus

32/20.8.2014 0.05 DUDA 0.05 Park at Vayas Nagar

32/20.8.2014 0.13 BUIDCO 0.13 Park at Kankarbag colony

32/20.8.2014 0.13 DUDA 0.13 Children park at Bandar

Bagicha

32/20.08.2014 0.14 BUIDCO 0.14 Traffic Control room

41/31.08.2015 2.50 BUIDCO 2.50 Bus stand in Malsalami

81/27.01.2016 2.39 Forest &

Environment

Department

2.39 Beautification of Park at S. K.

Puri, Shivaji Park, Rajvansi

Nagar, Police colony sector C,

Police colony sector D

116/3.3.2016 2.31 Forest &

Environment

Department

2.31 Sahid Veer Kunwar Singh

Azadi Park

86/13.1.2016 3.40 BSHB 3.40 Boundary wall of BSHB land at

Digha

74/22.12.2015 0.05 BSHB 0.05 Public convenience at

Hanuman Nagar Park

Total 76.00

(Source: Allotment letters and statement furnished by NNs and PBs)


108

Appendix-4.2


Statement regarding utilisation of grants sanctioned for specific purposes

(` ` ` ` in crore)

Sl.

No.

Name of

Nagar Nigam/

Parallel

Bodies

Allotment

letter/ Date

Component of

grant

Amount

received

Year of

receipt

Unutili-

sed

amount

Period

since

unutilised

1 BUDA

60/20.12.13 Infrastructure

development in

slums

25.76 2013-14 24.08 2 to 3 year

23/21.07.14 17.41 2014-15

2 Bhagalpur,

Nagar Nigam

79/18.2.13 Town Hall 0.21 2012-13 0.21 3 to 4 years

135/14.2.15 Samrat Ashok

Bhawan

0.10 2014-15 0.68

1 to 2 years

32/20.8.15 0.58 2015-16 1 year

3 Biharsharif,

Nagar Nigam


Bhawan

0.10 2014-15 0.68

1 to 2 years

32/20.8.15 0.58 2015-16

4

Gaya, Nagar

Nigam

05/09.02.09

03/09.05.11 Ghat

0.12 2008-09 to

2011-12 0.12

6 to 7 years

05/09.02.09

03/09.05.11 Ghat

0.15 2008-09 to

2011-12 0.15

6 to 7 years

05/09.02.09

03/09.05.11 Beautification of

Tower

0.14 2008-09 to

2011-12 0.14

6 to 7 years

05/09.02.09

03/09.05.11 Signage for names

of roads

0.04 2008-09 to

2011-12 0.04

6 to 7 years

80/11.02.13 Renovation of

Mountain/ Pond/

Ghat 2.09 2012-13 2.09

3 to 4 years


Bhawan 0.10 2014-15

0.10 1 to 2 years

104/29.12.14 Ghat 0.72 2014-15 0.72 1 to 2 year

5

DUDA, Gaya 41/29.12.11

Renovation &

Beautification of

Azad park cum

community hall

0.70 2012-13 0.70 3 to 4 years

6

Patna, Nagar

Nigam

79/18.2.13 Park in Janta Nagar

PRDA Flat 0.17 2012-13

0.17 3 to 4 years

135/14.2.15 Smart Ashok

Bhawan

0.05 2014-15 0.68

1 to 2 years

32/20.8.15 0.63 2015-16 1 year

7

BUIDCO

34/08.08.14 Beautification of

Adalatganj Pound 2.49 2014-15

2.49 1 to 2 years

112/28.2.14 Paver Block in

Mourya Lok 1.18 2014-15

1.18 1 to 2 years

117/14.3.13 Bus Stand at Bari

pahari 4.56 2012-13

4.56 3 to 4 years

78/19.11.14 Bus stand,

Bhagalpur 3.96 2014-15

3.96 1 to 2 years

110/28.02.14 Bus stand, Gaya

2.00 2013-14 4.22 2 to 3 year

78/19.11.14 2.22 2014-15

8 DUDA,

Patna

90/5.12.14 Construction of

community hall at

Begumpur

1.20 2014-15 1.22

1 to 2 years

32/20.8.15 0.02 2015-16

Total 48.19 (Source: Statement furnished by NNs and PBs.)

Appendix

109

Appendix- 4.3

(Refer: Paragraph-4.1.8.1, Page-58)

Statement regarding receipt and utilisation of grants released for construction of parks

(` ` ` ` in crore)

Sl.

No.

Name of

Nagar

Nigam/ Parallel

Bodies

Name of Park Allotment

Letter No./

Date

Allotme

nt

Amount

Expend

iture

Physical

Status

1.

NN

Patna

Construction of park in Janta

PRDA Flat Block no-2

79/08.02.2013 0.17 00 Work not

Started

2. Development and beautification of

Park at Patliputra colony

28/12.08.2015 0.65 00 In tender

process

3.

BSHB

Construction MIG Park at

Hanuman Nagar, Kankarbagh,

Patna

48/27.04.2014 0.93 1.06* Complete

4. 100 MIG Park No. 9 at

Lohiyanagar, Patna

67/22.10.2014 0.43 0.40 Complete

5.

BRPNN

L

Sri Krishna Nagar Park 352/18.01.2010 1.33 1.33 Complete

6. S.K. Puri Children Park 352/18.01.2010 1.89 2.58* Complete

7. Jai Prabha Hospital Park 352/18.01.2010 0.64 0.63 Complete

8. G Sector Kankarbag-22 park 352/18.01.2010 0.79 0.78 Complete

9. Park at 25 CC Kankarbag 352/18.01.2010 0.69 0.69 Complete

10. Park at Rajbanshi Nagar 353/18.01.2010 2.32 2.29 Complete

11.

DUDA,

Patna

Construction of Park in Anand

Vihar Colony near temple

41/29.12.2011 0.23 0.21 Complete

12. Construction of Park behind

Rajendra Nagar near telephone

exchange

41/29.12.2011 0.14 0.11 Complete

13. Construction of Park in kautilya

Nagar near pump house BMP

32/20.08.2015 0.29 00 Tender process

completed

14. Construction of children Park in

Bandar Bagicha

32/20.08.2015 0.18 00 Tender process

completed

15. Construction & beautification of

Park near veterinary college post-

mortem campus

32/20.08.2015 0.56 00 Work not

Started

16. Renovation of road in park under

Vayas Nagar sector B

32/20.08.2015 0.15 00 Tender process

completed

17. BUIDCO

Kankarbag co-operative society

park

32/20.08.2015 0.17 00 Incomplete

Total: 11.56 10.08 *Excess expenditure than allotment

( Source: Statement furnished by NNs and PBs.)


110

Appendix-.4.4


Statement regarding non-availability/encroachment of Land for Bus stands

Sl.

No.

Name of Bus

Stands

Name of Land Owner Name of Architect Payment

on DPR

(`̀̀̀ in

Lakh)

1. Bus stand at

Nawada

Zila Parisad Nawada M/S Sen & Lall consultant(p) Ltd. 3.21

2. Bus Stand at

Manpur (Gaya)

Gorakshini sewa samiti,

Gaya

M/S Sen & Lall consultant(p) Ltd. 5.16

3. Bus stand at

Purnia

Animal Husbandry

department, Purnia


4. Bus stand at

Sahebganj

Nagar Panchyat,

Sahebganj


5. Bus stand at

Motipur

Public works department,

Division-1 Muzaffarpur

M/S EDMAC Eng. Consultant 2.57

6. Bus stand at

Chakia

Nagar Panchyat, Chakia M/S EDMAC Eng. Consultant 2.57

Total 19.11 (Source: Statement furnished by BUIDCO.)

Appendix-4.5


Statement regarding receipt and utilisation of grants released for construction of Bus stands

(`̀̀̀ in crore)

Sl.

No.

Name of

Nagar Nigam/ Parallel

Bodies

Name of Bus stand Allotment

Letter No./

Date

Allotment

Amount

Expenditure Physical

Status

1. NN Bhagalpur

Construction of Bus

stand

78/19.11.14 3.96 00 Work not

Started

2. NN Biharshriff

Construction of Bus

stand in Biharshriff

107/28.2.14,

78/19.11.14

3.50 0.99 Incomplete

3. NN Gaya

Construction of bus

stand in Manpur

107/28.2.14,

78/19.11.14

4.22 00 Work not

Started

4.

NN Patna

Construction of

Malsalami Bus stand

41/31.8.15 2.50 0.37 Incomplete

5. Construction of ISBT

on Bari pahari

117/14.3.13 4.56 00 Work not

Started

Total 18.74 1.36

(Source: Statement furnished by NNs.)

Appendix

111

Appendix- 4.6


Statement regarding loss incurred/to be incurred on account of demolition of BQSs

Sl.

No.

Name of Bus Queue

Shelters

Cost of Civil and

Structural

Fabrication and

electrical works

(`̀̀̀ in Lakh)

Dismantling

& Installation

of Bus-Q-

Shelter

(`̀̀̀ in Lakh)

Total

(`̀̀̀ in

Lakh)

Remarks

1. Income Tax (UP)

1.80 0.96 2.76 To be demolished

2. Income Tax (Down)

1.80 0.96 2.76 To be demolished

3. Vikas Bhawan (UP) 1.80 0.96 2.76 Demolished

4. Vikas Bhawan (Down) 1.80 0.96 2.76 To be demolished

5. Mount Carmel School 1.80 0.96 2.76 To be demolished

6. High Court 1.80 0.96 2.76 To be demolished

7. Lokayukta Office (UP)

1.80 0.96 2.76 Demolished

8. Lokayukta Office

(Down)


9. Bihar Public Service

Commission(UP)


10. Bihar Public Service

Commission (Down)


Total 18.00 9.60 27.60

(Source: Files and records of BUIDCO.)


112

Appendix-4.7


Statement regarding details of amount collected but not deposited in special bank

account of Samuh Vikas Samiti

Sl.

No.

Name of the Samuh Vikas Samiti Account No. No. of

individual

toilets

Amount not

deposited in

the bank

accounts (`̀̀̀)

1. Chamar Toli Samuh Vikas Samiti 34901102189 20 0.30

2. Company Bagh Samuh Vikas Samiti 35114142824 104 1.56

3. Chunhari Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 0721104000101608 5 0.08

4. Golaghat Road Samuh Vikas Samiti 0721104000095594 7 0.11

5. Pasi Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 467510110008514 14 0.21

6. Refuzee Colony Samwardhan Samuhik Vikas Samiti 467510110008280 55 0.83

7. Gwalatoli Samuh Vikas Samiti 35361023494 15 0.23

8. Rikabganj Pawan Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 35361028028 5 0.08

9. Yadavpatti Samuh Vikas Samiti 35106865183 50 0.75

10. Mogalpura Chamartola Samuh Vikas Samiti 50284954223 13 0.20

11. Makbara Harijan Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 6162000100021809 86 1.29

12. Nasratkhani Samuh Vikas Samiti 36080110083942 41 0.62

13. Mistri Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 0721104000100441 56 0.84

14. Maharaj Ghat Road Samuh Vikas Samiti 467510110008758 7 0.11

15. Ramratan Lane Samuh Vikas Samiti 463610110009752 3 0.05

16. Kabirpur Gadhia Samuh Vikas Samiti 36080110095743 53 0.80

17. Sachidanand Nagar Samuh Vikas Samiti 467510110008036 114 1.71

18. Jawaripur Kalisthal Pokharapar Samuh Vikas Samiti 467510110008037 15 0.23

19. Jarlahi Samuh Vikas Samiti 0721104000100366 12 0.18

20. Kasba Gola Ghat Samuh Vikas Samiti. 0566010154345 7 0.11

21. Mahanpur Samuh Vikas Samiti 34901095884 149 2.24

22. Bairam Tanti Lane Samuh Vikas Samiti 35197451539 5 0.08

23. Warsaliganj Harijan Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 581110210000047 37 0.56

24. Gadhkachari Samuh Vikas Samiti 34489279039 58 0.87

25. Burning Ghat Samuh Vikas Samiti 35239649499 16 0.24

26. Beni Madhav Singh (2 lane) Samuh Vikas Samiti 34696201522 72 1.08

27. Parwatti Naya Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 0566010154840 28 0.42

28. Mohdiagar Harijan Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 581110210000048 63 0.95

29. Ishakchak Pashi Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 0721104000102919 27 0.41

30. Bounsi Road Harijan Tola Samuh Vikas Samiti 36310110002967 40 0.60

Total 1177 17.74

(Source: Statement furnished by NNs).

Appendix

113

Appendix-4.8

(Refer: Paragraph-4.1.8.7, page-70)

Statement regarding Loss of Revenue

Sl.

No.

Name of

the Site

No.

of

DPC

Date of

Transfer

by

BRPNNL

to PMC

Name of

the Agency

Allotment

amount

per year

Unit

Amount to

be realised

in five years

Amount

deposited

as 50 per

cent

Loss of

Revenue

(in `̀̀̀)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 9 (7-8)

1. Sanjay

Gandhi

Biological

Garden

2 20.07.10 Samadhan

Sewa Samiti

516000

(258000*2)

25,80,000 2,58,000 23,22000

2. NMCH,

Patna

2 19.07.10 Samadhan

Sewa Samiti

420000

(2*210000)

21,00,000 2,10,000 18,90,000

3. Bazar

Samiti

2 19.07.10 Samadhan

Sewa Samiti

471000

(2*235500)

23,55,000 2,35,500 21,19,500

4. Transport

Nagar

2 20.07.10 Samadhan

Sewa Samiti

450000

(2*225000)

22,50,000 2,25,000 20,25,000

5. Kargil

Chowk

1 22.02.10 Jai Mata Di

Sewa

Sansthan

408000 20,40,000 2,04,000 18,36,000

6. Chiraiya

Tad pul

Exhibition

Road

1 06.08.10 Jai Mata Di

Investment

Company

Pvt. Ltd.

365151 18,25,755 1,82,575.5 16,43,179.5

7. Boring

Canal Road

1 06.08.10 366200 18,31,000 1,83,100 16,47,900

8. Gandhi

Maidan

(Near

North gate)

1 17.02.10 Kaynat

Welfare

Association

406205 20,31,025 1,00,000 19,31,025

Total 12 34,02,556 1,70,12,780 15,98,176 1,54,14,604.5

(Source: Statement furnished by NNs and PBs.)


114

Glossary of Abbreviations

Th FC Thirteenth Finance Commission MB Measurement Book

FFC Fourteenth Finance Commission MC Municipal Commissioner

AA Administrative Approval MGNREGS Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment

Guarantee Scheme

ACEO Additional Chief Executive Officer MIS Management Information System

ARV Annual Rental Value MMGY Mukhya Mantri Gramodaya Yojana

BDO Block Development Officer NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

BFR Bihar Financial Rules NIC National Informatics Centre

BMA Bihar Municipal Act NN Nagar Nigam

BMAR Bihar Municipal Accounting Rules NP Nagar Parishad

BPL Below Poverty Line NRLM National Rural Livelihoods Mission

BPRA Bihar Panchayat Raj Act NULM National Urban Livelihoods Mission

BQS Bus Queue Shelter PAC Public Accounts Committee

BRGF Backward Region Grant Fund PBs Parastatal /Parallel Bodies

BRPNNL Bihar Rajya Pul Nirman Nigam Limited PD Project Director

BSHB Bihar State Housing Board PMC Project Management Consultant

BUDA Bihar Urban Development Agency PPP Public Private Partnership

BUIDCO Bihar Urban Infrastructure Development

Corporation Ltd

PRD Panchayati Raj Department

BUTCL Bihar Urban Transport Corporation Ltd. PRI Panchayati Raj Institution

CAG Comptroller and Auditor General PRIASoft Panchayati Raj Institutions Accounting Software

CEO Chief Executive Officer PS Pachayat Samiti

CFC Central Finance commission RAY Rajeev Awas Yojana

CMFA Controller of Municipal Finance and

Accounts

RBI Reserve Bank of India

CMMU City Mission Management Units RCC Reinforced Concrete Cement

CSS Centrally Sponsored Scheme RDD Rural Development Department

CVC Central Vigilance Commission RGPSA Rajeev Gandhi Panchayat Sashaktikaran Yojana

DDC Deputy Development Commissioner SBPDCL South Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd.

DDO Drawing and Disbursing Officer SFC State Finance Commission

DDP Draft Development Plan SGA Skill Gap Analysis

DLFA Director Local Fund Audit SJSRY Swarna Jayanti Shahri Rozgar Yojana

DM District Magistrate SLB Service Level Benchmark

DPC Deluxe Public Conveniences SMMU State Mission Management Units

DPC District Planning Committee SOTR State Own Tax Revenue

DPR Detailed Project Report SPO State Purchase Organisation

DPS Delayed Payment Surcharge SPUR Support Programme for Urban Reform

DUDA District Urban Development Agency SRSWOR Simple Random Sampling Without Replacement

EE Executive Engineer ST Service Tax

ELA Examiner of Local Accounts STEP-UP Skill Training for Employment Promotion amongst

Urban Poor

EO Executive Officer STP Skill Training Provider

ESC Empowered Standing Committee SULM State Urban Livelihoods Mission

EST & P Employment through Skill Training and

Placement

SWM Solid Waste Management

FSFC Fourth State Finance Commission TGS Technical Guidance and Support

GoB Government of Bihar TS Technical Sanction

GoI Government of India UC Utilisation Certificate

GP Gram Panchayat UD&HD Urban Development and Housing Department

IHSDP Integrated Housing and Slum

Development Programme

ULBs Urban Local Bodies

IR Inspection Report UNDP United Nation Development Programme

LBs Local Bodies UTAST Urban Technical Assistance Support Team

LFA Local Fund Audit VAT Value Added Tax

MAS Model Accounting System ZP Zila Parishad

Report No.4 of 2017 - Local Bodies Government of Bihar - CAG

Documents

Transcript of Report No.4 of 2017 - Local Bodies Government of Bihar - CAG